What most people don't realize is that shelf space is limited for games. As new games come and go the shelf space for games stays the same. Someone like EA or Activision print X copies of game and then sell them to the distributor who then sells or sends them to the stores. The object of the store is to sell as many as possible in a short amount of time as they have limited space. So putting it on sale is the way to make it move faster. That is why you will typically see a sale price at the store while the digital price stays the same. Just because a game goes on sale does not mean it fails or is failing. There is a lot more to the long term health of a game then box sales.

What's wrong with premades?

I know there has been many complaints about the game and while I enjoy playing the game and look forward to future content and features I feel I need to speak up about one aspect. The game has felt shallow in some respects since I started playing and I couldn't put my finger on what was causing that. The story lines are good, although I understand some don't like them. The classes are fine in number and usefulness. Crafting needs some work but it isn't all bad but still I keep feeling like something was missing. Today, it finally dawned on me what it was and I wanted to share it with the class so to speak. It is improper art objects for their purpose and the redundant use of the same art objects or with only slight changes to the design. To those going "Huh?" let me try to explain. Take the bridges on Balmorra for example. Many of the art objects that represent these bridges don't make any sense. They are too thick and the supports are to small for what you would need for a bridge that thick. A bridge deck approx. 6 meters thick to potentially cover a span 500 meters wide is ridiculous. To make matters worse the supports are to thin by comparison for the weight. Another example is communication towers that are way to short for the terrain. There are very large rocky outcroppings and ridges and yet the communication towers are on the ground and to short for the signals to pass. Sure, the anti aircraft guns are the size of naval turrets but the communication towers are smaller than a normal house chimney in todays world. We can carry this further. The pipes you see for the factorys on Balmorra are the same pipes used on Nar Shadda and Coruscant. All the planets buy from one manufacturer? The overall point I am making or trying to make is there is not enough diversity in the art objects to make the planets, cities, universe stand out. It is way to limited. While the colors and textures may change the overall look of the art objects typically remains the same. The rocks on Balmorra look very much like the ones on Tatooine. Why is this even a big deal? It isn't a game breaking thing but what it does do is limit the suspension of disbelief and it detracts from the vastness that there is a big universe out there. It adds to the belief that the game is shallow and not enough depth in the visuals to keep it interesting. Believe it or not a expansive and large universe is part of what Star Wars has to offer but as of right now it seems that everyone pretty much shops at the same place for instillation equipment. So here is my suggestions: Create different and unique art objects for each planet. Try to limit reusing an art object to only representing its original form and function. Pay closer attention to what is the function of the art object in the game world. Look closer at how the static art object would be used if it was actually functional. For example, down in the first area of the AA guns for the Republic on Balmorra does there really need to be a IMP crawler when it would have to be flown in and couldn't be used cause it is basically a complete box canyon? Fin TL;DR Version: Blah blah blah stop using the same stuff over and over again.

I am enjoying the game and even pvp, although I admit I am not a hard core pvp player. Honestly, you see this kind of thing in every game forum. Usually followed with "haters gonna hate"... that type of thing. Some of what people complain about is real and does need to be addressed and I am sure it will over time. It is easy to speculate and claim that some people have a sense of entitlement or there was to much hype before launch or my personal fave "This is 2012, how could they launch a game like this, in this state." etc etc etc. The point is everyone has a right to their opinion and while some may go about it in a negative fashion I would be willing to bet they even they want the game to succeed and contribute to everyones gaming hobby. (Edited due to lag @ ISP)

This....

At least it wasn't a sky is falling thread... It was, "Thanks to numerology... Blizzard is Evil and Bioware is the victim" thread +1 Internets for effort

People who think a game "fails" when it goes F2P are really fooling themselves. The F2P model has been a round for a long time in Asia and is slowly making its way over here. As a matter of fact in 2006 (If I remember correctly) EA was a major proponent of F2P at the 06 Game Developers Conference. Gaming is shifting to a more casual model of game play. Just look at the IPO of Zynga as an example of what to expect more of in the future. The introduction of apps for smartphones and the like are promoting more and more casual gaming styles. MMOs are starting to follow this type of model. It doesn't mean that the game fails when it goes F2P it means that the developers are looking at ways to make more for their investment dollar. I suggest people do more research into the F2P model and understand why developers are looking at it overall.

Ok... its starting to clear up a bit. So let me see if I got this correct. You are saying there should be an incentive to attack bases and towns and that currently the level of the town is such that any town can't be attacked accept by a well armed and armored force with sufficient numbers and this should be adjusted by the level of a zone?

Not meaning to defend the original quote but what you say here is actually inaccurate. If you follow the GDC (Game Developers Conference) and other game related development news and interests sites you would discover that in currently the casual gamer is where the money is rolling in from. Sandbox and grindfest mmos lost a lot of mainstream interest due to the fact of the time necessary to be competitive in overall game play. With the introduction of casual games into the more mainstream the tendency to attract more players blossomed. Just some notable ones, Puzzle Pirates, Plants vs Zombies, Bejeweled and many of the facebook games. Which I might point out allowed Zynga to have a very nice IPO. The point is that the market for games has been changing for some time and is still in a transition of a sorts. EA has been watching this very closely and I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't bring the casual side into more of a focus for SWTOR in the hopes of making more money than a more hardcore style MMO. I am not saying I agree or disagree with the model but its here and now we just have to deal with it.

Ok, having read the entire thread I am still slightly confused. I get kind of what the OP is asking for but does this not or can this not already take place on a PVP server. Naturally I wouldn't expect to see it in a PVE server and since I am not a big pvp'er and only pvp occasionally that is where I would be. However, if you get on a PVP server then shouldn't it be open world pvp all the time? Another question I have, in some place like Tat... even with the level 50 guards why not put together a raid and raid someplace like Anchorhead etc? Granted you would need a few or more players and couldn't do it solo but why not put together a group and do it? To be honest, I am surprised no one has done this yet even on a PVE Server. Big raid group goes and stomps the snot out a town. I can't see anything preventing that now. Overall my big question is why can't you do all this now, such as town raiding etc on a PVP server already or are you wanting it to be where you can solo the towns? Not trolling just asking.

To answer the OP question, because in my opinion they sucked.

Leia in the slave outfit... I'm a traditionalist

Legacy name: Stormsaber Honestly, cause at the time I couldn't think of anything better.

George Lucas created a fictional universe... honestly that is all he did. As far as his message goes that some in this thread allude to that isn't the only message there. The other message is that it is ok to be a bunch of terrorists who blow up a government building as long as you think your right. Then in the prequels it shows Palpatine getting lawfully elected. So now you have the movies 3, 4, and 5 just reenforcing the idea that the "Rebellion" is actually terrorists who are bent on overthrowing the lawfully elected government. The overall point is there is always more than one perspective and no one will ever really know what the correct one is.

What I find interesting is that people keep thinking a game fails if it goes F2P. I am not sure but I bet many are not aware of the fact that EA was one of the ones promoting the F2P model as it saw the benefits in Asia. The only difference between a sub model and a f2p model is just that the business model and the business will choose which one it thinks it can make the most money on. So right out of the gate, saying a game going f2p= fail is ridiculous. Next, if you look back at the history of MMO's very few actually "fail". One of the fastest "failures" in MMO history was APB and even it was resurrected. SWG was considered a failed MMO after the NGE but even it was around till SWTOR came out. Regardless of if as a player you think a game fails or not there are certain things that go along with all MMOS and this one is no different. There are bugs, performance issues, glitches, exploits etc and there will always be, what it ultimately comes down to is personal choice. The choice to play or not to play. On an individual can make that choice based on what they can live with and what they can't. Just because someone makes one choice or the other does not mean that the game is fail or not. Only time will tell that.

Personally I think he should have left the Star Wars megaverse alone and let others take it and run with it. My problem with George has and will always be his egotistical rants and musings about his movies. Once you make a movie and present it to audiences you should expect an amount of criticism and what not. Also, he wanted to tell his story... fine but by the same token it is ok for the rest of us to disagree with his version. AKA the prequals. Just because he owns the rights to Star Wars doesn't mean that he is protected from criticism or ridicule.

Lost track of the years Pre CU-post NGE Smuggler on Bloodfin 2 Crafters on Bloodfin as well.

At this point, I have lost track of which one of these threads I was posting in...

No, we had the discussion over on the STO forums at launch as well. Currently as the way the laws are written, when selling the box you are selling a product. Now the fact that to achieve the full use of the product, you have to go online and sign in is at the moment irrelevant as you were able to buy the product as advertised. This is covered in the disclaimer that "only game play may vary" and other disclaimers. Once you go online the product changes to a service that is no longer regulated in the same way as a standard service is since it is online. If the game was hosted on EU servers and based in the EU it would have to comply with all relevant law in the EU. Since it is not however compliance is based on a voluntary basis. This was one of the reasons Atari originally sold of it EU operations as to get out from under the EU regulatory burden they were under. (Atari has since changed and done different things I only added that as an example of how other companies were dealing with it.) That does not mean that the EU places an unnecessary burden concerning regulations but for there to be legal compliance there has to be a physical presence of some sort in the EU.

Ah... gotcha. I understand now.

Actually only in certain cases. Such as the box you bought yes it would have to comply but since you are playing on a US server, the actions taken on that server and not bound by EU law.

While I don't like that it is down I don't think it is over maintenance just a lack of experience in dealing with multiple servers that can be patched in blocks etc. I don't know what you mean lag spikes, haven't noticed any that didn't have to do with my ISP. No game issues there for me. CS... haven't had to deal with them. Only happened once for me while in space... rebooted system... worked fine. I don't get the overpricing. They went with the standard pricing model. 6 and 7 are rolled in to one. The game is freshly released this was bound to be the case. I think there was a lot of pregame hype and I don't think that were able to deliver on it all by release. However the game is fun, at least for me so this boils down to personal opinion. 8. Huh? What department? Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if this thread isn't closed by they time I finish typing all of this.

Since it is a US game, created in the US and based in the US it isn't bound by those laws.

Then you have the wrong companies. They tell me that they are working on it, where the outage is and how long it will take to fix and yes occasionally they will provide compensation. Especially my cable company.

I used can and string... to many dropped calls but ya gotta use what ya gotta use