Do you know the signs?
Im a firm believer that free-to-play games arent inherently evil. A shocking statement, I know, but there are a ton of fantastic free-to-play games out there that really go the distance to ensure their players can have a great time without spending a dime. This list is not about those games.
The game wont let you play it.
One of the classic ways free-to-play games apply pressure is by forcing the player to grind for new content. Theres nothing wrong with grinding per se--its a great way for cash-strapped gamers with some free time to make reasonable progress in a game they enjoy. But some developers take it a bit too far, limiting your playtime so drastically that its nearly impossible to make any progress.
Clock Blocked
Continuing the theme, one of the key indicators of a bad free-to-play game is the inclusion of timers. Of course, as with all other items on this list, timers can be more or less villainous--its a matter of degrees. Very few games, including Clash of Clans and Extrasolar (not a mobile game) handle timers well. Clash of Clans doesnt prevent you from accessing core gameplay with its timer system, nor is the timer system excessively punitive. In the case of Extrasolar, the long breaks required between sessions are a key part of the games story and mechanics--not merely a tool to disrupt the players sessions.
The Daily Grind
Timers are worrisome because they limit your playtime, but its possible to swing too far in the other direction. Some less-than-savory developers require players to spend untold hours grinding to unlock endgame content. Grinding is a key part of many genres--JRPGs are notorious for it--but no genre is as dependent on grinding as the free-to-play. Thats not to say grinding is inherently evil--like most of this list, grinding only becomes a problem when a game makes unreasonable demands on a player.
Pay to win...
Collectable Card games are one of the fastest growing segments of the mobile market, but they have a big problem: they are inherently pay to win. Most of these games require players to amass a huge library of cards to be competitive, then use their libraries to modify or boost the powers of their decks. Players can acquire new cards by playing the game, but at a much slower rate--usually limited by timers and stamina gauges. Paying players can buy new cards directly (in the form of booster packs) or pay to avoid the timers and energy guages that will slow their progress.
...and pay to lose?
When a player throws down money on a free-to-play title, they ought to get something concrete in return. As simple as that idea is, many completely fail to deliver on it. Get stuck on a level in Candy Crush saga and you can buy boosters but those boosters only make the game easier. Have a bad few hours and you might not progress, wasting the money you spent on the boosters.
Obviously low-quality
This one speaks for itself--players can spot poor games. No player can start up a game like Super Monster Bros and claim that the developers poured their heart and souls into it. Its a complete mess--the platforming is floaty, imprecise, and almost entirely broken. Prompts to purchase items come fast and furious, offering items for ludicrously high prices. Were talking triple digits here, folks, for items in a game that is fundamentally broken.
