This happened to me again.. Spoiled the ending of the JK story, due to the Makeb prompt. BioWare, please fix this so others don't have the same problem I was finishing a planet (Voss, I think) and after the holo conversation, the terminal on my ship was clickable again right after, so I clicked it and the first line that the NPC says spoiled the ending to my story. I really don't understand why they base the accessibility on this by level, when they know that you haven't finished your story (ie: no chapter 3 buff yet or acheivement, etc).

Played a few rounds this evening and had fun with it. Seems like a very solid addition to the game, imo.

Guess not

I like how you keep saying it's not necessary for them to use more up front wording, yet in every single example you've given, you've used better wording than they did. You just said that it doesn't hurt you for them to use better verbiage, so I'm not sure what you have to gain here by keeping this debate going..

I think you're off-base here, and reading way too much into what I said... My feedback is simply that I think they would have more satisfied customers if they communicated this better. If you liked the wording, you can say that without trying to add some fictional ulterior motive to my post and inciting an argument about whether my feedback is valid.

No, but if I did, I imagine you would be standing behind me in line, ready to try and invalidate my opinion/feedback. The faulty analogies are really not helping here. I'm not saying that coupons can't have conditions. It's *how* you state those conditions. They didn't say "50% off cartel coins offer" - you've purposely changed the wording to better suit your argument. They said "all subscribers get 50% off the first in-game purchase". If there are a bunch of caveats to that, why not just say "some conditions apply", or just list them? And why do you feel them including this type of verbiage hurts you in some way that makes you keep posting against it?

Those are faulty analogies. I don't think people are complaining about wanting to get something for nothing. I'm certainly not. The issue is with the communication about the deal and the way it's being pushed. If I go to swtor.com and it says "subscribers get 50% off first purchase", and then I'm on the forums and they post this: .... I'm not expecting to have to buy something at full price, as a subscriber. If they want to charge for the first purchase I would have been totally cool with that, if not for the tricky wording. $5 to enable this is nothing, it's the principal of BioWare being intentionally unclear about it.

There's no technical limitation that forces them to make us buy something.. they can charge $1 and refund it like every other online system does automatically, or use countless other methods of validation without making the customer buy a 2nd item. And if they don't want to do that, it's fine - but communicate it clearly, and don't leave information out to try to trick people into going through this process. This isn't an attack that anyone should feel the need to defend; it's just feedback that the communication could have been a little more up front.

Wow, this does seem like a scam.. I was totally about to buy some coins until I realized they're forcing you to buy coins outside the game, in order to enable in-game purchases - and the 50% off is only applicable to the in-game purchase. Seems like BioWare was being intentionally misleading with their 50% off marketing campaign.

Because the PvE Group Finder queue being slow doesn't stop people from accessing the majority of the PvE content. Last night I wanted to get my daily done before I went to bed, so I queued for a warzone. The wait was about 10min, which I found a little annoying. I was hoping for an arena, but I got a voidstar.. So, in the system you're proposing, I would have been in the Arena queue and the Voidstar would not have popped when it did, because you would have had at least 1 person (me), not in that queue.. The next warzone I got put into was a 2v4 arena, and I enjoyed it (I was on the outnumbered side, but it was fun being able to get some kills and last a while). If we can have choice without breaking the wait times for all servers, then that makes sense to me.. If they mess up the queue times, I think you'll see a lot more complaints popping up than there are now.

New content requires coding, and so does cross-server queues.. That means they would not have been able to implement the content they did in the past 2 years and also do cross-server queues at the same time. They've basically said this themselves. I don't know about the other companies that have cross-server queues, but I played SWG for many years and we went through the same debate and the devs also did not implement cross-server queues, due to difficulty/time. Don't get me wrong, I agree with everyone saying they'd like cross-server queues... I just don't agree with the implication some are giving that BioWare is somehow maliciously depriving us of this feature on purpose.

I fear that if they spent that "2 years they had" implementing cross-server queues at the expense of content, there wouldn't be anyone left playing the game. (btw, check out this article for the devs comments on x-server queuing from the community cantina, if you're interested)

lol, you're right but if we're going to be that particular, they're all faulty analogies, because having the choice in food doesn't create a queuing/time problem

The funny thing is that it seems like most of the complaining is coming from the people doing the quitting. Situational 4v3s happen all the time in the 8v8 warzones... A few thoughts: 1. Some people say they'd be willing to wait longer for the queue times - how much longer? There is a point where the wait time becomes unacceptable. 2. What about low pop servers, whose wait times could suffer even more? 3. When the SSSP PvP queue is added, will that add an even larger split of the queues that will cause even longer wait times? Personally, I'd be more willing to have Arena's removed from the lvl55 Reg queue, than to split them.

I think that's a faulty analogy. As I understand, your point is that it's a subjective matter and some people prefer one thing over another. I don't think BW is trying to make people "eat dog poo". I think that they're in the steakhouse business and a few vegetarians walked in and became upset when they couldn't order veggie burgers... And hey, it's a valid complaint, but like anything, it won't change unless there are enough vegetarian customer's going to steakhouses to justify adding it to the menu.