Plants vs. Zombies 2- What Went Wrong?

[Kolyarut]

Actually, you were the one who said they were more successful. I said we don't have enough to go by. You passed judgement on their business model based on one game, not me. I said Popcap were successful. Not that they aren't now.

Also it does matter how they sell their game. I have bought Plants vs Zombies 4 times. I won't touch this one since they have chopped it up and put it behind a paywall trying to pass it off as free. So this method of selling is directly affecting my enjoyment of the game.

They *have* been more successful at getting it to more people. The bit we don't know about is if they've been successful at getting more money out of it. The only judgement I was passing on the pay to play business model was that it's not as effective at getting people to play the games.

Your second paragraph is just not true. They've put some plants behind a paywall, but most are not. The game *is* free. 100% of the original game is behind a paywall. The only thing stopping you from downloading and playing the entire game right now is you.

(I've only bought the original three times, so I guess I lose on that side of the debate, but saying how much extra money you've spent on the first game doesn't really help when you're making the case that the first one is the more consumer-friendly of the two)

 

[Yopaz]

Actually, you were the one who said they were more successful. I said we don't have enough to go by. You passed judgement on their business model based on one game, not me. I said Popcap were successful. Not that they aren't now.

Also it does matter how they sell their game. I have bought Plants vs Zombies 4 times. I won't touch this one since they have chopped it up and put it behind a paywall trying to pass it off as free. So this method of selling is directly affecting my enjoyment of the game.

They *have* been more successful at getting it to more people. The bit we don't know about is if they've been successful at getting more money out of it. The only judgement I was passing on the pay to play business model was that it's not as effective at getting people to play the games.

Your second paragraph is just not true. They've put some plants behind a paywall, but most are not. The game *is* free. 100% of the original game is behind a paywall. The only thing stopping you from downloading and playing the entire game right now is you.

(I've only bought the original three times, so I guess I lose on that side of the debate, but saying how much extra money you've spent on the first game doesn't really help when you're making the case that the first one is the more consumer-friendly of the two)

OK, your link said nearly 25 000 000 downloads.
Bejeweled: over 75 000 000 SALES over 150 000 000 downloads.

Nearly 25 000 000 means less than 25 000 000. Over 150 000 000 means more than 150 000 000. That's one sixth of the number, how is that more successful? Remember, I am talking about the business model, not the game.

Read my first post and you'll get the clarification of what I mean... however since I have mentioned that I am comparing EA's BUSINESS MODEL to PopCap's BUSINESS MODEL 3 times so far without you catching on I will also explain it here.

Plants VS Zombies 2 is a game. It is free to play. You can play it for free by downloading it. You don't need to pay for the game itself. To make up for this they have decided that you have to pay in other aspects. If you want to move on with your game you either have to complete some challenges throughout the stages or you can pay to progress.

If I just want to enjoy the game without having to do this then I have to pay. If I think performing these tasks is boring and I just want to move on I have to pay. If I want to breeze through the game without any concern of these challenges and rather do this on a later occasion... I HAVE TO PAY. It DIRECTLY affects my enjoyment of the game. Am I wrong? Is this all in my head?

I spent the amount I did on buying the first game because I wanted it on different platforms. I knew what I was getting into beforehand, the cost was there in front of me when I bought it. I bought it because I wanted to support the game in the hope that it would get a sequel. Now that is has got one I don't care. My opinion, not a fact.

Edit: Also didn't you say in your last post that you didn't prove anything? Now you're saying that they ARE more successful... why the sudden change of heart? I know I didn't prove anything, you seem to jump back and forth between having proved something and not.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

In short: EA bought Popcap

/Thread

Seriously, between the F2P, IOS only launch and firing the creator George Fan the game was going to be crap no matter what happened.

 

[Kolyarut]

OK, your link said nearly 25 000 000 downloads.
Bejeweled: over 75 000 000 SALES over 150 000 000 downloads.

Nearly 25 000 000 means less than 25 000 000. Over 150 000 000 means more than 150 000 000. That's one sixth of the number, how is that more successful? Remember, I am talking about the business model, not the game.

Read my first post and you'll get the clarification of what I mean... however since I have mentioned that I am comparing EA's BUSINESS MODEL to PopCap's BUSINESS MODEL 3 times so far without you catching on I will also explain it here.

Plants VS Zombies 2 is a game. It is free to play. You can play it for free by downloading it. You don't need to pay for the game itself. To make up for this they have decided that you have to pay in other aspects. If you want to move on with your game you either have to complete some challenges throughout the stages or you can pay to progress.

If I just want to enjoy the game without having to do this then I have to pay. If I think performing these tasks is boring and I just want to move on I have to pay. If I want to breeze through the game without any concern of these challenges and rather do this on a later occasion... I HAVE TO PAY. It DIRECTLY affects my enjoyment of the game. Am I wrong? Is this all in my head?

I spent the amount I did on buying the first game because I wanted it on different platforms. I knew what I was getting into beforehand, the cost was there in front of me when I bought it. I bought it because I wanted to support the game in the hope that it would get a sequel. Now that is has got one I don't care. My opinion, not a fact.

Bejeweled has been out for over a decade. If PvZ2 has managed a sixth of its lifetime sales in the first two weeks that's still fairly impressive - but there's been so many paid and free versions of Bejeweled out over the years that I think it's a difficult comparison. I picked up BJ2 (oh, so that's why they don't use that abbreviation) for free when they straight up gave it away a few years back - wouldn't have bothered if I'd had to pay. I don't know how many of your stats are paid downloads vs. free players, but assuming it's 100% paid, it would be interesting to compare it to how many people got it via some sort of F2P scheme (it's been given away, it's been on MSN, Facebook, can be played for free via Chrome... the list goes on).

Your complaint about "what if I find the game boring" isn't improved by pay-to-play. If you play PVZ1 and find it boring and you just want to move on... you can't. Now you can't play any more. They still took your money. Worst case scenario in both cases is you give up and do something else. The best case scenario in the F2P version is that you can skip the bit you weren't keen on and get back to what you were. Honestly, I kind of think paying to skip the star gates is a waste of time and money, but I don't object to someone else having the option to. Why would I?

You're telling me your enjoyment of the game might be affected if you were given the choice between paying to skip a bit you potentially might not like. I'm telling you that your enjoyment of the game *is* being affected by the fact that you've pledged not to play it altogether. That last bit *is* a fact.

I will agree on the point that F2P games should do a better job of letting you know about potential costs up front. It's certainly possible for F2P costs to spiral out of control and that's shady as heck - if PvZ2 was doing that then I would call it on that.

[Edit to reply to your edit - I couldn't prove whether they were more financially successful or not. I said the stats pointed to the second game getting more players. No change of heart.]

 

[Yopaz]

OK, your link said nearly 25 000 000 downloads.
Bejeweled: over 75 000 000 SALES over
150 000 000 downloads.

Nearly 25 000 000 means less than 25 000 000. Over 150 000 000 means more than 150 000 000. That's one sixth of the number, how is that more successful? Remember, I am talking about the business model, not the game.

Read my first post and you'll get the clarification of what I mean... however since I have mentioned that I am comparing EA's BUSINESS MODEL to PopCap's BUSINESS MODEL 3 times so far without you catching on I will also explain it here.

Plants VS Zombies 2 is a game. It is free to play. You can play it for free by downloading it. You don't need to pay for the game itself. To make up for this they have decided that you have to pay in other aspects. If you want to move on with your game you either have to complete some challenges throughout the stages or you can pay to progress.

If I just want to enjoy the game without having to do this then I have to pay. If I think performing these tasks is boring and I just want to move on I have to pay. If I want to breeze through the game without any concern of these challenges and rather do this on a later occasion... I HAVE TO PAY. It DIRECTLY affects my enjoyment of the game. Am I wrong? Is this all in my head?

I spent the amount I did on buying the first game because I wanted it on different platforms. I knew what I was getting into beforehand, the cost was there in front of me when I bought it. I bought it because I wanted to support the game in the hope that it would get a sequel. Now that is has got one I don't care. My opinion, not a fact.

Bejeweled has been out for over a decade. If PvZ2 has managed a sixth of its lifetime sales in the first two weeks that's still fairly impressive - but there's been so many paid and free versions of Bejeweled out over the years that I think it's a difficult comparison. I picked up BJ2 (oh, so that's why they don't use that abbreviation) for free when they straight up gave it away a few years back - wouldn't have bothered if I'd had to pay. I don't know how many of your stats are paid downloads vs. free players, but assuming it's 100% paid, it would be interesting to compare it to how many people got it via some sort of F2P scheme (it's been given away, it's been on MSN, Facebook, can be played for free via Chrome... the list goes on).

Your complaint about "what if I find the game boring" isn't improved by pay-to-play. If you play PVZ1 and find it boring and you just want to move on... you can't. Now you can't play any more. They still took your money. Worst case scenario in both cases is you give up and do something else. The best case scenario in the F2P version is that you can skip the bit you weren't keen on and get back to what you were. Honestly, I kind of think paying to skip the star gates is a waste of time and money, but I don't object to someone else having the option to. Why would I?

You're telling me your enjoyment of the game might be affected if you were given the choice between paying to skip a bit you potentially might not like. I'm telling you that your enjoyment of the game *is* being affected by the fact that you've pledged not to play it altogether. That last bit *is* a fact.

I will agree on the point that F2P games should do a better job of letting you know about potential costs up front. It's certainly possible for F2P costs to spiral out of control and that's shady as heck - if PvZ2 was doing that then I would call it on that.
[Edit to reply to your edit - I couldn't prove whether they were more financially successful or not. I said the stats pointed to the second game getting more players. No change of heart.]

Are you even reading my posts. I said Bejeweled had been downloaded more than 150 MILLION TIMES and SOLD MORE THAN 75 MILLION TIMES. I have cited the number of SALES several times over two different posts. Now seeing as you haven't grasped this yet 75 MILLION SALES 150 TOTAL DOWNLOADS. That means people have paid to get Bejeweled more than 75 MILLION TIMES that's the number of SALES THE GAMES HAVE HAD and more than 75 million free adding to a total of more than 150 millions.

Among the Facebook, Myspace and on the PopCap website plays that doesn't even count since that's not among those that are DOWNLOADED.

Also I did not complain about the GAME being BORING. I complained about the CHALLENGES YOU HAVE TO COMPLETE IN ORDER TO PROGRESS CAN BORE ME and that I can AVOID THEM BY PAYING. If I find the CHALLENGES in Plants vs Zombies boring, then you know what I do? I don't do them. I continue the campaign and maybe I feel like doing them later. Who knows? I'm not being prevented progress because I didn't want to complete all the rounds of I Zombie, Zombiequarium or Zombiebejewled Twist. I play the campaign and I do the other things when I feel like it. It's not a requirement.

Now please READ this post before I have to point out what I have been saying for 3 posts again. Also I tried to make my part about the sales more visible. I hope you notice it this time.

 

[Kolyarut]

Are you even reading my posts. I said Bejeweled had been downloaded more than 150 MILLION TIMES and SOLD MORE THAN 75 MILLION TIMES. I have cited the number of SALES several times over two different posts. Now seeing as you haven't grasped this yet 75 MILLION SALES 150 TOTAL DOWNLOADS. That means people have paid to get Bejeweled more than 75 MILLION TIMES that's the number of SALES THE GAMES HAVE HAD and more than 75 million free adding to a total of more than 150 millions.

Among the Facebook, Myspace and on the PopCap website plays that doesn't even count since that's not among those that are DOWNLOADED.

No need to go Capslock warrior on me. I missed that there was a distinction between paid for and free downloads there (you haven't actually quoted a source on that, but what I've Googled seems to match up). You've still comparing a decade's worth of sales to two weeks of PVZ downloads. If 75m people have legitimately downloaded it for free, that's fantastic. Good for them! Who knows, maybe after ten years of PVZ they'll start giving that away for free too, like Bethesda do with Arena and Daggerfall.

Also I did not complain about the GAME being BORING. I complained about the CHALLENGES YOU HAVE TO COMPLETE IN ORDER TO PROGRESS CAN BORE ME and that I can AVOID THEM BY PAYING. If I find the CHALLENGES in Plants vs Zombies boring, then you know what I do? I don't do them. I continue the campaign and maybe I feel like doing them later. Who knows? I'm not being prevented progress because I didn't want to complete all the rounds of I Zombie, Zombiequarium or Zombiebejewled Twist. I play the campaign and I do the other things when I feel like it. It's not a requirement.

Now please READ this post before I have to point out what I have been saying for 3 posts again. Also I tried to make my part about the sales more visible. I hope you notice it this time.

The challenges you have to complete in order to progress are playing some levels of Plants vs. Zombies with some mission requirements. They simply are playing the game. You can't tell me that those challenges can bore you if you haven't played the game and absolutely refuse to play the game. You seem to be running under the assumption that the roadblocks are oddball levels like Zombiequariam - they're not, they're standard levels with a couple of mission requirements like "generate X sun" or "don't plant in the shaded squares". If you ran across a mission in PvZ1 that you didn't like (there were bowling and vase smashing levels in the first game's campaign, and lots of carousel levels) then yes, your progress was halted.

I could go on, but I'm having to explain everything you'd find out naturally by playing the game, so it's difficult to have an informed discussion about it.

The point stands that you still never have to spend anything at all. If you want to spend the original game's $20 asking price to skip half the game, though, it's always an option if you prefer.

[EDIT to fix broken quote]

 

[Yopaz]

No need to go Capslock warrior on me. I missed that there was a distinction between paid for and free downloads there

I put sales in caps lock and you still failed to miss the point. Also from my earlier post:

Bejeweled has sold more than 75 million copies and downloaded more than 150 million times. So if you don't want to do the maths here, Bejeweled has sold 3 times more than the free game has been downloaded and that's actually with less marketing.

I have never made a SUBTLE distinction here. I broke it down to condescending ease for you and you didn't catch it. I had it in caps as a separate line and you didn't catch it.I have used the word SALE multiple times and you didn't seem to catch it. I use caps because you don't catch my point, but it seems to be wasted.

I also didn't say the level requirements were anything like Zombie aquarium, I simply said that the original never demanded that I did anything outside the regular campaign. I have the choice when I want to do those things and I like that. I actually loved playing Zombie Bjeweled Twist, I am simply giving them credit for making it an optional thing.

Replaying the levels with specific mission requirements to move on is something I don't like. Again, this is my OPINION not a fact. I said this in my last post, but you don't seem to catch this either. When PopCap made the original they focused on making a solid game. This time they have added stuff to slow down the campaign or to have us pay them. I know what the extra mission requirements are about, no need to explain that to me. I'm not judging the game without knowing anything about it.

Now so please, let me explain this one last time. I don't like the mission requirement thing because it's something I have to do unless I pay. I don't like that. I would probably do it at some point if the game gave me an option. That isn't the case. It gives me three options. Do it, quit or pay. I simply don't like the business practise.

Now we also moved away from business practises at some point... PopCap was about making simple games with low budgets.
EA is in the business of buying and shutting down companies. they just shut down one last month (or was it this month) doing basically the same thing as PopCap is doing now. They also do franchise butchering such as turning games we like into shooters such as Syndicate and... Plants vs Zombies. PopCap was smallish, but successful, there's no denying that. EA seems to be posting losses for every quarter.

 

[Kolyarut]

No need to go Capslock warrior on me. I missed that there was a distinction between paid for and free downloads there

I put sales in caps lock and you still failed to miss the point. Also from my earlier post:

Bejeweled has sold more than 75 million copies and downloaded more than 150 million times. So if you don't want to do the maths here, Bejeweled has sold 3 times more than the free game has been downloaded and that's actually with less marketing.

I have never made a SUBTLE distinction here. I broke it down to condescending ease for you and you didn't catch it. I had it in caps as a separate line and you didn't catch it.I have used the word SALE multiple times and you didn't seem to catch it. I use caps because you don't catch my point, but it seems to be wasted.

You've put a lot of things in capslock - it just comes across as shouty and rude, it's not a great way to prove a point. Spamming the numbers with very little context doesn't help your case. If it was, I'd be pointing out you're comparing fourteen days of sales to (very roughly) 4380 days of Bejeweled being out. We still have no idea how many sales were made at full price, how many were sold at discount, or any number of other factors. Bejeweled is a different game made for a different market - we may as well be comparing it to Animal Crossing or Call of Duty. Even if any of the Bejeweled comparison was relevant, it would still be equally relevant for the original PvZ, which was sold the traditional way.

I also didn't say the level requirements were anything like Zombie aquarium, I simply said that the original never demanded that I did anything outside the regular campaign. I have the choice when I want to do those things and I like that. I actually loved playing Zombie Bjeweled Twist, I am simply giving them credit for making it an optional thing.

You said;

I'm not being prevented progress because I didn't want to complete all the rounds of I Zombie, Zombiequarium or Zombiebejewled Twist.

...implying you thought you had to do something comparable to progress in PvZ2. This is wrong. You have to do some (not all) standard levels.

Replaying the levels with specific mission requirements to move on is something I don't like. Again, this is my OPINION not a fact. I said this in my last post, but you don't seem to catch this either. When PopCap made the original they focused on making a solid game. This time they have added stuff to slow down the campaign or to have us pay them. I know what the extra mission requirements are about, no need to explain that to me. I'm not judging the game without knowing anything about it.

You're entitled to that opinion - in fact, this is the closest we've come to discussing the thread topic in ages. Personally, I don't mind doing some of this - though I actually do think they go slightly overboard with it. But at the end of the day, every round of PvZ (except the gimmick levels) in both games is replaying the same thing over and over - same map, same plants, slightly different zombies to fight. I think this is the principle reason people are weary of PvZ2 - in the first game they already had you play it as much as was fun.

Now we also moved away from business practises at some point... PopCap was about making simple games with low budgets.
EA is in the business of buying and shutting down companies. they just shut down one last month (or was it this month) doing basically the same thing as PopCap is doing now. They also do franchise butchering such as turning games we like into shooters such as Syndicate and... Plants vs Zombies. PopCap was smallish, but successful, there's no denying that. EA seems to be posting losses for every quarter.

...yeah, we moved away from the business practises because it was a total threadjack. The thread title was asking what went wrong with PvZ2, it wasn't "why not rage about EA". No interest at all in re-hashing the most overrepeated thread on the internet (along with LoL vs Dota and "what I don't like about Anita Sarkeesian").

 

[Yopaz]

You've put a lot of things in capslock - it just comes across as shouty and rude, it's not a great way to prove a point.

You didn't read it in the first post where I had no caps. You onlt noticed it when I put it in big blue letters. That first post was also very short. You were also the first one to post numbers saying nothing. Just saying.

...implying you thought you had to do something comparable to progress in PvZ2. This is wrong. You have to do some (not all) standard levels.

I made a comparison stating that the original gave me a choice. You just decided to put more meaning into it rather than to trying to understand my post.

You're entitled to that opinion - in fact, this is the closest we've come to discussing the thread topic in ages. Personally, I don't mind doing some of this - though I actually do think they go slightly overboard with it. But at the end of the day, every round of PvZ (except the gimmick levels) in both games is replaying the same thing over and over - same map, same plants, slightly different zombies to fight. I think this is the principle reason people are weary of PvZ2 - in the first game they already had you play it as much as was fun.[/quoted]

I stated that this was my opinion in the post before too. Also I said I wanted the choice to do these things when I please not that I didn't want to do it at all.

...yeah, we moved away from the business practises because it was a total threadjack. The thread title was asking what went wrong with PvZ2, it wasn't "why not rage about EA". No interest at all in re-hashing the most overrepeated thread on the internet (along with LoL vs Dota and "what I don't like about Anita Sarkeesian").

In what way? I don't dislike Plants vz Zombies because it's a bad game. I dislike it because of the business practises they use. So the business practise is the direct reason I don't like the game. Everything I would want to have removed from the game is directly tied to the business model of the game.

The things the OP is ranting about? Yeah, that's tied to the business model too so it's not a thread jack. It's an explanation of what went wrong in his and my view. Now I have already stated that this is my opinion and time will tell if PopCap will end up buried in the ashes of EA's failures or continue being successful.

 

[Battenberg]

As soon as I heard there were going to be microtransactions in PvZ 2 I knew I wasn't going to want to play it. I can't stand it and I detest EA for trying to force it into so many games as it is just immersion destroying. That said I did think it was going to be a case of pay to play past a certain point so the fact that they included a way of continuing without doing this is a small plus I guess, even though it does sound disasterously dull.

 

[Kolyarut]

You've put a lot of things in capslock - it just comes across as shouty and rude, it's not a great way to prove a point.

You didn't read it in the first post where I had no caps. You onlt noticed it when I put it in big blue letters. That first post was also very short. You were also the first one to post numbers saying nothing. Just saying.

The numbers I posted did say something - that the sequel has been played by more people than the original. You seemed to acknowledge that earlier - I thought that was the whole reason you went and found another game to contrast it to?

I made a comparison stating that the original gave me a choice. You just decided to put more meaning into it rather than to trying to understand my post.

Except, as we discussed a few posts up, the original doesn't give you a choice at all when it presents you with gimmick levels, if you don't want to do them you have to stop playing. The one that gives you a choice is the second one.

In what way? I don't dislike Plants vz Zombies because it's a bad game.

I honestly think it's crazy that even if it was a fantastic game you'd still dislike it, even knowing that you could skip all of the bits that you don't think you'll like for less than the cost of the first game. Your prerogative, though.

I dislike it because of the business practises they use. So the business practise is the direct reason I don't like the game. Everything I would want to have removed from the game is directly tied to the business model of the game.

The things the OP is ranting about? Yeah, that's tied to the business model too so it's not a thread jack. It's an explanation of what went wrong in his and my view. Now I have already stated that this is my opinion and time will tell if PopCap will end up buried in the ashes of EA's failures or continue being successful.

It's not a threadjack to discuss how the microtransactions are implemented. It is when you start complaining about EA's treatment of the Syndicate franchise.

 

[Yopaz]

You've put a lot of things in capslock - it just comes across as shouty and rude, it's not a great way to prove a point.

You didn't read it in the first post where I had no caps. You onlt noticed it when I put it in big blue letters. That first post was also very short. You were also the first one to post numbers saying nothing. Just saying.

The numbers I posted did say something - that the sequel has been played by more people than the original. You seemed to acknowledge that earlier - I thought that was the whole reason you went and found another game to contrast it to?

Well, they did say that, but spoke nothing of the game's success. Number of people willing to download a PopCap game for free. Thus I compared it to how many were willing to buy a PopCap game. Your link said nothing except that people download free stuff.

Except, as we discussed a few posts up, the original doesn't give you a choice at all when it presents you with gimmick levels, if you don't want to do them you have to stop playing. The one that gives you a choice is the second one.

The survival modes, the puzzle modes and the mini game modes are completely optional. There is a few gimmick stages, but they are designed as a part of the campaign rather than repeating something you have already done. If I don't want to play Zombie aquarium then I won't if I don't want to repeat levels with mission requirements then I have to pay. This is a point I have been trying to make several times both in caps and without. You don't understand it and I doubt you ever will. The sequel offers a choice, but one of the choices involve micro transactions.

I honestly think it's crazy that even if it was a fantastic game you'd still dislike it, even knowing that you could skip all of the bits that you don't think you'll like for less than the cost of the first game. Your prerogative, though.

You missed my point completely here. Again.

It's not a threadjack to discuss how the microtransactions are implemented. It is when you start complaining about EA's treatment of the Syndicate franchise.

Fair enough, I'll give you this one. Although I was making the comparison of Plants vs Zombies and Garden Warfare here, but then again, different game not relevant.

 

[Kolyarut]

Well, they did say that, but spoke nothing of the game's success. Number of people willing to download a PopCap game for free. Thus I compared it to how many were willing to buy a PopCap game. Your link said nothing except that people download free stuff.

Except - and you will not acknowledge this for even one post, for some reason - you compared how many people downloaded it in two weeks to how many downloaded it over several years. My assessment of the situation - both for Bejeweled and for PvZ - if people downloaded something fun to play, great, I hope they had fun with it. There's a good chance in both cases that they will have done. Hurrah!

The survival modes, the puzzle modes and the mini game modes are completely optional. There is a few gimmick stages, but they are designed as a part of the campaign rather than repeating something you have already done. If I don't want to play Zombie aquarium then I won't if I don't want to repeat levels with mission requirements then I have to pay. This is a point I have been trying to make several times both in caps and without. You don't understand it and I doubt you ever will. The sequel offers a choice, but one of the choices involve micro transactions.

...and because they are designed as part of the campaign, you cannot skip them, but they made you pay anyway. In PvZ2, the challenge missions are designed as part of the campaign, but you can skip them, if you choose to pay. Only in the case of PvZ2 do you have the choice *not* to pay.

It's disingenuous to ignore the fact that for PvZ1 you paid on the way in, and to assert that PvZ2 is villainous for hoping that you might optionally put some money towards it. (It's also disingenuous to ignore the fact that, post-patch, PvZ1 actually charged you on the way in then offered microtransactions to skip the grind to unlock more puzzle levels, which is the worst of both worlds)

I honestly think it's crazy that even if it was a fantastic game you'd still dislike it, even knowing that you could skip all of the bits that you don't think you'll like for less than the cost of the first game. Your prerogative, though.

You missed my point completely here. Again.

Is your point not "they will charge me if I don't want to unlock the star gates in game"? If not, can you summarise it in a sentence? Explain to me what the difference is between "if I pay $20 I can play PvZ1 without replaying levels" and "if I pay less than $20 I can play PvZ2 without replaying levels"?

 

[Ghostfreak]

Honestly, people wouldn't complain about this game half as much if Popcap had just honored their fanbase, the PC gamers. I don't understand why they just slapped them in the face. First an iOS release, then an Android, still just ignoring all the people on PCs who would have loved to buy this game.

This comic pretty much described my feeling on Plants vs. Zombies 2: http://www.8bitgamer.com/comic/plants-vs-zombies-2-stock/

 

[Faelix]

Just shut up and pay for the game maybe?

You do understand it's a business right. You're acting as if you deserve the premium treatment when you are just a guest. You play the demo, hey, you can unlock and get more. It's really just for kids who haven't got a creditcard and like to do stuff they can master.

So that's nice of the devs. Don't know why you are complaining actually.

 

[Ghostfreak]

The game is free....What are you talking about? Have you played PvZ2 before?

I'd actually pay for the game if it were on PC...