There is no meaningful difference other than the fact that the easier you make gambling, the easier it is to grab addicts. There’s been uproar for many years — https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB846202501868224000

Yes. If we take the original point entirely literally and solely at face value, then yes, it makes total sense to focus on an immediately broken revenue-generating tool. I actually agree that's the right place for the devs to focus in this case. So there's no dispute with your response. Here's the original comment: If you read this allegorically or even satirically, as I did, rather than literally confined to this sole scenario (and as I believe it should be read), then the point is that it's emblematic of a bigger problem with priorities (e.g. in this case 'speed of response'). IMO the quoted post succeeds satirically. So when I respond to this: I'm saying that if it's really just a "company that wants to make money," then this overall prioritzation of short-term revenue boosts over long-term investments might not actually lead to more money....

I can certainly see the argument that it's a short-sighted, misguided allocation of resources. And that prioritizing the fixing bugs and addition of content--while cost-burdensome up front--are actually smarter, more sustainable ways to "make money." Games like TESO redoubled efforts after weak launches and now do well with both subs and their cash vendor. I.e. if more people want to play your game, more people will traverse your CM and whatnot...

Not that this is wrong per se, but it is exaggerated. The issues here are not technical, and a "re-write of the entire client" (whatever that means; here I'm assuming it means source or server) is not required. Any game can be modded. I want to make that clear: from a software perspective any game can be modded. Just as an example, keep in mind that any time you see "hackers" in this or any other game, they are just modders with bad intentions. That said, some games (likely this one) are harder than others, especially those where modding was never factored into the original design (or, was intentionally attempted to be factored out). And I agree with you and Xordev and others that dev support and resources are very important (how much, and moreso how much relative to the value added, is really an open question). But even without any dev support or tools, the game could be modded. For example GTA V had no official toolset and was heavily modded for years by an active open-source community (helps to have millions of active players too...) Being technically feasible doesn't end the inquiry, I agree. We'd need EA/BW/Disney approval. And, to be valuable, there would need to be some dev support. Also a community is needed. Perhaps all of that sinks the notion entirely--and I understand that cynicism. But IMO, that's an entirely insufficient argument from the devs (I could elaborate if needed). FWIW, my cynical hat suspects that it's different motives (namely CM which rakes on cosmetic items) that are the blockers in the end. But as long as we're seeing visual glitches and bugs that have persisted for years and aren't being addressed, this option should be kept on the table....

More or less this. We don't need access to the engine files -- very few games allow that. Point is, there are issues (just as an example, clipping on certain robes) that lend themselves very well to mods. Not asking for new mod content, maps, worlds, or the like (at least I'm not)....

I agree that there will need to be some policing. But these aren't insurmountable issues, and IMO the benefits outweigh the costs. BW could specify the game variables and assets it wished to expose. For example, it could be that image assets aren't connected to the main game code, or could be separated. BW could pre-select the first batch of modders and require strict ToS. Someone submits a mod that makes players nude, ban 'em. Other things too--just saying, there are ways to make this resut in less work for them while letting the community fix some issues. Let's start with "unofficial patches" addressing long-time bugs, and let's go from there. But I think it's past the time where they can say (by implication) "we're stretched too thin" and then also say "no mods".... EDIT: by the way, I took a look at your stuff - nice!!!

With the number of bugs and other issues, and given the lean resources allocated to this game, isn't it time for BW/EA to lift the block on the modding community and allow other willing coders to help out the game? BW doesn't even have to accept all mods -- they could and QC an approve the ones they like, and pass on others. What am I missing here? Everyone wins....

This is just another reason for the devs to open up the game to modding community. We could fix a good number of these bugs and optimize a bunch of other aspects of this game if given a chance. Devs could decide what to include and what to reject. It's just frustrating that we have to deal with "not enough resources" issues when there is a whole community of smart people eagerly ready to help fix the game we all love...

I was a bit confused when I wrote this:o. So I missed the most obvious explanation which is just that seller is just selling items crafted from a bunch of other toons (even more ironic since I do this myself). The fact that all the items have maker's name worn off (every time, week after week) was a red herring and is explainable in a number of ways ppl mentioned, including that this is old inventory that's not really moving. Baked into my confusion was the, untested, assumption that the inventory was continuing to be recycled and still showing no name. But it's just as likely that seller just has a backlog of stuff to move that isn't moving....

Awesome! Best of luck, Eric and May the Force Be With You!

I suppose this is the simplest answer . It's just that all the maker names are worn off, but I guess that's easier to explain. I'll be going now...(thanks)....

There is a seller on the GTN (Satele Shan) who sells items from several crafting professions (cybertech, armstech, synthweaving, etc.). The seller typically has pages and pages of BiS crafted items/mods for each profession (306s) and each items has the "the maker's name has been worn completely off" label. But here's the kicker, the seller's name is always the same name (I've been very careful to see if there are special chars/accents, and there aren't). Pages and pages, all crafting professions, all 306 items, and all with same seller name and 'worn off" label. Given the 30-day cooldown to changing a toon's name, and given the one crafting profession per toon limit, how is it possible to have the same seller's name, day after day, week after week, on items across multiple professions simultaneously? (Note, I've intentionally kept the seller's name out of this, and posted no screenshots - but you can see this anytime if you're on SS)....

This is what I said about crafting last June following some 6.0 announcements. I was hopeful so long as it was thought out well--it wasn't. As a long-time crafter, I offered the "necessary" conditions for making crafting viable as a game within the game. Some may quibble with point #2, but they key for crafting as a mini-game is that it has to be an "alternative" to other gaming options. For example, in earlier metas a ranked PvPer or NiM ops player wouldn't craft because the time required meant that they had to make a choice. This created a supply scarcity which allows crafting to be viable as a mini game (assuming the 3rd condition above is met as well). Such scarcity creates an ideal market--those who want great gear can get it by playing toughest content OR they can grind easier content OR they can buy it from crafters. Market isn't flooded with items under cost, and crafters can't sell at too high a price or else ppl will find alternatives. It all works with some fine-tuning here and there. But if you must play a bunch of different content in order to craft items--and said alternative contents offers a direct path to the the same crafted items--then [insert obvious conclusion here]. With 6.0, there is really no reason at all to invest in crafting as anything more than an annoying way to gear up your own toons. But the fix for this is easy: For RE'ing for schematics, remove the requirement for mats coming from game content. Restore the green<blue<purple hierarchy to mats and allows purples and blues to be obtained from missions; greens from gathering and missions. Do this by keeping the bonded attachments mats requirements limited to greens and blues. If you want to add a gate, make purple mats (obtainable from mission crits) required for bonded attachments for gold tier. Purples should be rare (crits), and only required for crafting the purple tier items (tier immediately under BiS) (or if needed purple attachments for gold tier). For RE: Green --> blue schematic should remain 60% chance. Blue --> Purple should drop to 20%. Purple --> Gold should be 10% chance (I'd argue for lower, but ppl may not like that). Crafting of gold tier item should require some amount of end-game/content-generated component(s). Again, encourages ppl to play that content and sell the items on GTN to willing crafters. I know none of this will happen, but I felt like writing it anyway....

Oops, yeah you're right. Misinterpreted...

All of the legacy unlocks I've looked for (mostly armor, weapons, and toys) are all original prices as of today....

I admit. I looked at this thread again, so I'm part of the problem feeding it. But to be clear, the OP never said he was being harassed. That's been entirely projected on to the OP. He even admits it sounded worse than it was. OP has since gone on to say this: Again, not claiming harassment, not claiming bullying. No mention of RPing. Just something he's "annoyed" by more than anything (and which led him to sabotage his teammates, undermining their play experience, but I digress...). A fleeting peeve. I'm an RPer who does PvP mostly. And I can say that this happening before a warzone is probably the least offensive time for it to happen. It's extremely common for someone to rally up the troops or be social in WZs. This post didn't deserve to be taken as seriously as it did (even by the OP's own comments). Making this into some dramatic stand against harassment is just an unnecessary over-read....

^^This. The name was likely already taken. Far more likely than any other explanation....

OPs arguments are really nothing more than idiosyncratic gripes with free market philosophy. There is nothing normative in the OPs concerns (e.g. there is no normative basis for concluding what a sub should include, how much it should cost, etc.). Seeing as the complaints are entirely personal and unique, it's hard to place his arguments into any broader debate context. Take an automobile. One buys a new car in 2019, certain this are expected: it starts, it drives, it's powered by an energy source that's obtainable, it has airbags, it meets government standards, etc.. The the sound system, sports package, sunroof, navigation, etc. are all optional. And even the price itself depends on the class, market, supply/demand, etc. If dealers charged for airbags (they do, but of course that's baked in already which is another problem with OP's arguments) or for a steering wheel, or the ignition, then there would be an issue. The OPs argument goes along the lines of when I buy a car, I expect all luxury, non-essential items to be included at no additional charge. OP rejects the idea that a dealer might "entice" a customer to upgrade the sound system by including a functional, but uninspiring, system in the base model, and charging a premium for the higher quality version. This is a fine position to have, but it's not one that merits any debate. It's too idiosyncratic, and it fails to account for a number of additional factors (e.g. how some customers may be content with the base model and be unwilling to pay even a dime more for an upgrade, costs of goods sold, etc.)....

9/10. Excellent job by the OP here! Nothing over the top, and just enough indignant tone to push believability w/out turning ppl off. Framing this as a question was also a master stroke. Superbly done....

Appreciate what you're trying to do here with keeping the conversation on track. As a movie buff, I enjoy long, cinematic cutscenes as much as the next person. I also enjoy good story telling. But if I'm playing a game, I also feel the need to be able to...play. Otherwise, honestly, I'd rate the story-telling here (when separated from gameplay) as below most other SW content, including all of the Skywalker storyline movies and the Clone Wars animated series. So if I'm to put the mouse and keyboard away and just watch the screen, I'd prefer other SW storylines (personally). So there are some things said above that I bristle at -- oft-repeated counters to the argument for increasing the difficulty. People playing this game, and looking for a challenge while leveling/open-world, want to do so while having their companions with them and gear on. We want to feel like we need our companions and gear in order to progress. I can't emphasize this enough. If you take a game like the Witcher 3, or even the Mass Effect games, you can play those games multiple times and always feel challenged, or, after a playthrough you can play them again with much less challenge if you just want story (this is what I did with Witcher). How is this achieved? By using a difficulty toggle. An option for different difficulty modes in the leveling and open-world game play would be the real way to make everyone happy (and even better if there are cheevos and rewards too for tackling the harder content). Most RP games have difficulty modes that make the game itself challenge you, rather than the artificiality of tying one hand behind your back, playing naked, without a weapon, using on ability only -- that's not challenge, that's just madness....

The problem with this post (besides needless drama) is that it way overcomplicates a very simple issue, and it indicates a misunderstanding of the current state of affairs. "Sweeping game changes?" The current WAM, that's already in game, debuffs XP 40% during regular XP game play, outside of the double XP events (also debuffs during the events). I use this daily on all leveling toons--the one that's already in the game now. I stacked these a while back, so I'm good. What the players "complaining here" are saying is that the vendor is only available during the rare double XP events. So if you didn't grab it then, you can't get it until the next event. The simple request (admittedly over-dramatized in the OP) is to the make this already-existing vendor available permanently. I admit the OP was over-the-top, but this here is the simple ask -- just make the vendor available daily....

Except they've offered the WAM and made it usable even outside of double XP. It debuffs XP 40%. The devs also periodically offer double XP. So they've also decided that people who want to play at a different leveling speeds be able to do so, and they've offered a variety of options to accommodate different interests. So you really should be saying "for me" . Setting aside the needless hyperbole on both sides, my question is this: what exactly is the problem with making the WAM vendor available at all times for those who want to use it for whatever reason? Who, exactly, is hurt by that....

I play in SM, and I find the continued spawning of skytroopers so annoying that I can't finish. And I'm someone who can play the vanilla stories over and over again, so it's not a "story" thing. The story is fine actually. But the seemingly endless spawning of troopers, which is an obvious time-gating mechanic, ruins KOTFE/KOTET for me. I've only gotten to chapter 5 of KoTET with one toon, and even though that toon is my "main" who I play weekly for conquest/PvP, I just can't motivate to take my limited time and spend it slogging through these chapters. None of it is "hard," just tedious and annoying....

Yeah. He accidentally quoted the wrong person. Just would like to point out that I use the WAM all the time on all toons, because I'm someone who enjoys leveling far more than anything else. And if you like lowbies PvP, the WAM allows you to play longer in lowbies before hitting max level. So for players like me, level is more than just an arbitrary number....

I'll bet you were: a) clear and concise about what happened, b) courteous, and c) specific about the resolution you wanted, and willing to work w/ them to achieve it (e.g. providing screenshots). This is more or less the recipe for successful dealings with ANY customer service, including this game. Problem is, often (not always), people launch into unclear tirades and rants which only confuse, then turn off, the CS agents....