It exists SOLELY to make you pay more for the game than you would have if it had been sold at a single initial price. Otherwise, what would be the point? It accomplishes this by nickling and diming you constantly, "microtransactions" (which often aren't all that micro, really), and so on. Making you pay over and over, like a coin-op machine did back in the arcade era. That's bullshit, and I'm having none of it, none at all. Ever.
That's a very narrow view of things when F2P covers a very large gamut of payment models.
Many of the early F2P games as well some some of the current "quick and dirty" F2P games still do that. PWI's MMOs, for example are notorious for requiring some payment at some level for progression into the upper tiers of useable items. However, even then the entire game was still available. Generally these are also considered "pay to win." But these are a dying breed with fewer and fewer of them getting made.
Some early F2P models, like Sony's early F2P MMO (can't remember the name but it was targeted towards children and women), locked content behind paywalls. Most of the game was free, but some dungeons and many classes required payment in order to gain access to them with no in game method to gain access. That was in addition to the cosmetic items. These types could also be somewhat considered "pay to win" if people felt that the locked classes were more powerful than the free classes.
More modern F2P games, however go about things differently. Money is more about convenience than gaining access to content which is locked away.
Path of Exile, for example, is purely about paying for cosmetics and conveniences like larger guild vaults. And many consider it a significantly better game than Diablo 3 or Torchlight 2, both retail games.
Warframe you can gain everything purely in game if desired. Only extra storage slots for weapons, warframes and companions as well as some cosmetics can only get gotten through the use of Platinum, their version of real world currency. But even that can be gotten in game if you are willing to sell items you got in game to other players in game for their platinum. So players can get every single thing in game without paying a single thing.
Guildwars 2 is a hybrid where it's single purchase for the game, but in terms of MMO's has a F2P monthly model with cosmetics and convenience items serving to maintain their server costs as well as bring in revenue.
DOTA 2, Team Fortress 2, etc. - purely cosmetic like POE. Many F2P games are like this.
LoL, Smite, etc. model - cosmetic and characters locked behind either a paywall or significant in game grind. The alternative model generally followed by F2P games.
F2P games that lock content behind a paywall without an in game method (even if it requires a bit of a grind) of unlocking that content are a dying breed.
So what happens?
1. A very large number of people try the game out because it's F2P, maybe have fun for a few days or weeks and then stop never paying anything.
2. Another chunk of players will continue playing the game for months, again without paying anything.
3. A smaller chunk of players will spend roughly the same as they would for a retail game (40-60 USD) and that's all they ever spend on the game.
4. And then a very small chunk of players (relative to all the players that have ever tried the game so this could be hundreds of thousands if multiple millions of people have tried the game) will spend more than what a retail game would have cost. But they will also likely play the game and have more fun with it than any retail game they've bought.
A lot of games fall into case [1] for me. Ghost recon online, League of Legends, DOTA 2, etc. Had fun, decided it wasn't my type of game for longer term enjoyment and didn't spend a dime. On the other hand I know people that have spend hundreds or thousands of dollars.
A few games fall into [2] for me. Team Fortress 2 or Path of Exile, for example. I've play it off and on for the past 3+ years and haven't spent a dime.
One game falls into [3]. Smite. I paid 40 USD to unlock all characters and all future characters. So same as I would have spent on a retail game. But did not spend any money on cosmetics (I know some people that have spend over 100 USD On cosmetics).
And one game falls into [4]. Warframe. I've now spent about 240 USD on the game. And will probably be spending more on it in the future. Mostly as a way to reward the developers for making a game that I have been playing for over 2 years now. The only thing that rivals that for me is MMOs, which generally have a monthly fee. On the other hand I've had friends that played with me for months at a time that never spent a single dime on the game.
What's the point of all this? The games are F2P, you pay whatever YOU want to pay. Don't want to pay anything? Then don't. Want to reward the developers for making a game you love and encourage them to make either more content or more games? You can (Like I'm doing with Warframe).
I fail to see why offering the players a choice is somehow bad. Smite at the 40 USD offers SIGNIFICANTLY more value than I'd get out of a standard retail game. How many standard retail games are still releasing content updates 2+ years after you started playing it? Warframe I'm actually paying more than I would for a retail franchise spread over multiple games because I want to reward them for making a game I really REALLY like to play...a LOT. I have more real world currency in game than I actually know what to spend it on (I grind out everything in game and don't buy it).
And the rest of them? I got to play them and try them out without spending a single dime of my own money. Some for just a few days. Some for weeks or months. And a few for years off and on.
It's always
your whether to spend money on these games. And if a person chooses to spend their money, no matter how much they spend, it is never "wrong." I'm not going to tell anyone how they should spend their money. If they spent their money and had fun, then that is all that matters.
Regards,
SB
PS - this post was probably too long, but don't feel like trying to put in a TL: DR summary.