Hmmm, this I'm actually all right with. Of course I would prefer to have the option available for credits, but I'm okay with it. It's straightforward and I think many mentioned being willing to pay real money for that option. Though I am happy with what my characters look like, I'd be willing to pay for this as well. I do hope the price won't be outrageous, though.

I call it an 'exploit', because randoms packs depend on players spending a lot of money for the chance at getting something they find very desirable. (Which is generally one of the rare or ultra-rare items, I'd say.) From what I've seen, they generally spend more than they would if that item was available for purchase outright. I don't have a degree in psychology, so no, I can't explain to you the details of that behavior, but considering packs of a similar nature are implemented in many online games, it stands to reason that they sell well and they do so not because they're generally considered to be a "fair deal", but because some people just feel that they need that one item. You're free to think it's a perfectly fine practice of course, just as I am free to see it differently. When did I talk about a problem that needs to be dealt with? I did mention a problem and reading over what I wrote, I agree that I was being unclear. I'm not a native speaker and I was struggling with how to end that sentence, so the wording is off. I meant to refer to the overall discussion. Basically, what I was saying is that I think putting all responsibility on one party without considering any other factors (or simply deeming them unimportant), is a narrow way of viewing 'the problem' as in, the topic of this discussion. By other factors I mean, for example, strategies employed by a company to target a very specific type of person to maximize profit.

I do appreciate your honesty! At least you come right out saying you only mean to mock whatever it is I'm going to say, regardless of what it might be. It really helps me take you seriously. That said, I'm not quite sure what it is you're expecting to hear. Problem? The problem I have with the system is that I don't perceive it as "fair" or "honest" or any such concepts that I'm sure you find laughable. The problem, as I see it, is that these random packs work so well because of certain tendecies people seem to show when it comes to online games. I disagree that it's all right to exploit these tendencies (such as spending more money than they probably should, because they feel they must have that one item at all costs and surely it will be in the next pack). That's my problem. That whatever can be done (legally and it terms of player acceptance), will be done if it earns them more money. The complete lack of - wait for it, I can hear you scoff all the way from here - ethics. I'm not sure why you listed those examples in your post. I don't think I ever stated that half the player base is going to become homeless due to the CM or any such thing.

For what it's worth, I agree completely. Whether it's "real" gambling or "real" addiction by definition is, in my opinion, beside the point. If they didn't mean to encourage thoughtless spending, they wouldn't have these packs to begin with. The reputation system is just another thing to entice players to spend more money than they would otherwise. Saying that everyone's responsible for their own actions is fine and dandy, but that's a very narrow way of seeing the problem. Exploiting certain tendencies people show is all right, because it's legal and makes them money? I disagree. Ideally, there should always be rules in place to protect people from themselves, if necessary. But of course EA is not interested in anything that could negatively affect their profit.

What are you talking about? Did you read the entire first post? If so, please make sure you understood it correctly. I do so love people who accuse other players of wanting "easy mode" without having understood the issue at all. The OP doesn't want to be some "ultra-awesome-pwn-PVP-champion" without investing any time or effort, they want to be able to defend themselves against random people in open world PVP without having to grind PVP gear, because they feel that they're at a severe disadvantage without it.

Indeed. That's the thing, though - you, personally, roll greed as well as need. But if someone were to stick to the mindset you are defending (i.e. rolling need on whatever is perceived as being 'needed' by that person), it would soon create the scenario I've been describing of people getting frustrated by the lack of consensus and rolling need on everything. Thank you for your answer, and no, I never expected to agree with it. I think it's a sub-optimal solution since I don't consider companions as important as the main character, but that's a matter of opinion. (As is this entire argument, of course, but it's an opinion I can understand even if I disagree.) My main issue really is that you don't seem to mind someone defining when they can roll need for themselves wihout any sort of justification. In fact, it appears you are against people wanting everyone to stick to a more or less generally accepted set of rules. I'm not really closer to understanding why now that we've been exchanging views a couple of times. The only explanation I can find is that you don't want anyone to be forced stick to rules they don't like (even if you yourself don't seem to have any problem sticking to them even though you don't seem to perceive them as 'fair'). It does seem to me as though we're at an impasse. I doubt anything else I could say would change your mind and I also doubt you're going to change mine. Unless you'd like to keep this discussion going, thank you for taking the time to explain yourself and keeping your tone pleasant in spite of getting a lot of opposition. Edited for better wording.

I have to agree. Developing new chapters for eight classes will most likely not happen. It's incredibly expensive and an enormous effort and while I think almost everyone would be willing to pay for that, many are obviously willing to pay for re-colored armor as well and I don't think I need to point out which route is easier for EA/BW to take. Basically, why would they put a lot of resources into developing new story content when it's so much more efficient to just throw out a new Cartel Pack every couple of weeks/months? It would make us happy, yes, but I dare say their income > our happiness. Of course people are threatening to leave if they just keep adding CM stuff, but I don't know if it's a significant amount of people, especially compared to how much money they make via the CM. (I also don't know how many people make good on their "threats" and how many just leave without saying anything.)

I agree. I'd like a more average/fit body type for women as well, type 2 looks too much like a comic book character, all big chest and small waist. (Especially the chest looks ridiculous in some armor designs.) Body type 1 could use some fat and muscle as well... I'm all for having a slim body type, but I'd like for my character not to look anorexic.

In that scenario, yes, player D doesn't get the item. However, if everyone else rolls greed on another item and only player D rolls need, because he feels he needs it for his companion or for credits, the other players get their chance denied, because they operated under the assumption that need = upgrade for main character. You don't think it's correct to make that assumption or rather, you don't think it's correct to make other people stick to the same rules. Fair enough. Now please don't ignore my main question if you answer to this: Why do we have need/greed in the first place if there are no conventions, no unwritten rules to adhere to? Why would anyone roll greed if they can't at least assume that if a person rolls need, they only need that item for their main character and not so they can sell it? Why give up their chance, as you put it, to get the item? There's no point. If there's no generally accepted definition of "need" (even if it's not defined in the game itself), the system is worthless. I don't want to give someone an item if they're only going to sell it, because I could sell it as well. So everyone would always roll need. Would you prefer that?

Players A, B and C don't want player D to pass on the roll, they want him not to simply take the item, which is what happens if he rolls need and everyone else greed. So he's denying them their chance at the item. If they don't want that to happen, they all have to roll need. Which leads to the scenario I described in my first post. Everything you just said you've said before and it doesn't answer my questions to you. I accept that you don't always roll need and yet seem to think it's fine if someone does, but then why wouldn't everyone always roll need? Why do we have the system of need/greed in the first place? Of course it's not the end of the world. It's an item in an MMO. It's utterly insiginficant, but if none of us cared, we wouldn't be playing this game, would we?

I'm still wondering if you're trolling. I know this is annoying to hear if you aren't, but I've been reading your posts and have no idea how someone can come to the conclusions you've arrived at. Look, players A, B and C aren't denying player D the loot at all - they're asking for equal chances for everyone. Why is player D more entitled to the loot than the other players? Because they "choose" not to need? "For charity" presumably (going by the example in one of your other posts)? Where does this mindset that you're defending lead? When are people supposed to select greed then? When they're feeling generous? This would lead to most people always rolling need. I know I would. Why select greed if they guy needing the item might just sell it anyway? Fair enough, but then why do we have this system at all? Why not give everyone equal chances to begin with?

This is exactly how feel. Well said!

Brilliant, thanks for the laugh.

Yes, at the end of the day it's not my problem if people spend $800 on pretty pixels of course. I also agree that there must be an enormous amount of people willing spend so much money on stuff like that or else they wouldn't have come up with this concept. Ideally I'd like to see people get a fair deal (and I don't consider random packs to be fair, but opinions may vary on that) regardless of whether they are willing to shell out more if only pressed enough, but that's not how the world works, I'm aware.

Did my first post seem as though I'm likely to respond with hyperbole, conflation or distortion? (Also a sincere question, I want to know if I'm expressing what I'm feeling correctly.) Basically, I'm not sure that there are any players who dig that sort of thing and by that I mean players who wouldn't rather just get to purchase the item they want outright without any randomness involved. (The random nature of the pack is obviously only in place to make people who REALLY want the item spend more money than they would if they could just buy it.) Now this system adds a little bar to fill up and rewards tied to that - yet more incentive to spend money if you're the kind of person who likes titles/achievements or really want one of the rep vendor's items, when they also could have just made the items available as normal CM items or included them in the packs. What's worse is that there appears to be a rep bar for each shipment so they don't even pretend it's about loyalty or long-term reward. I understand that they need money, of course. I'm not against the CM per se, but I find this kind of system that encourages unreasonable spending... sleazy, to be honest. And since they don't give us insight into their financial situation (not that I expect them to), I can't ever be sure that they aren't just trying to make as much money as possible as opposed to offering players a fair deal. It seems that way to me. The main counter-argument is that nobody's forced to buy anything. I agree and I wouldn't spend a cent on those packs, but that doesn't mean I can't resent the system when, in my opinion, it targets people with certain habits (spending more than they should, "needing" to own an item as a status symbol etc.) specifically.

At this point, the blatant greed only makes me laugh (bitterly, though). I was very unimpressed with the rep system for CM packs to begin with, but it seems that they're more than capable of making a bad system worse. I feel more like an observer as I have never spent any real money on random packs in any of the games I've played and that won't change now, but I haven't come across quite so greedy a scheme yet. I think that they might change something about it as most people dislike this latest piece of information (though I'm surprised to see that there are still people defending it), but that doesn't change that they thought at one point that this was a good idea. It's sad that their statistics seem to show that there are enough players who spent enough real money on fluff to warrant such a system.

I think at the very most they'll say a line when arriving on the planet and maybe another line during the story quest. But I don't have any official info, all I remember is an interview where the question of companion interaction was dodged by saying "they won't be silent" or something that effect. If there was anything meaningful in terms of companion interaction, they would have been using that to advertise Makeb.

Yeah, don't be too surprised if that comes up a lot. Can you re-name guilds? It might be worth it. If you aren't familiar with the book, google it. It's not only a pornbook, it's an atrocious pornbook from what I've heard about it. (Opinions may vary, of course )

I understand that they need to make money. It does feel a little like that's all they're trying to do, lately, but that's not really the main point of my (mild) displeasure when it comes to this. I am going to ignore it just like I ignore all the other vanity items in the CM, but... unless I misunderstand something, the new system is as follows: Spend money (real or in-game) to buy items so you can fill a little bar until at some point you can spend some more money on the items you actually want. I'm unimpressed. Edit: Yes, this is very true. It feels like they used a regular game feature to promote CM sales and that's bound to upset people. It's probably the core of the issue. If it was just some random bar in the CM window, I think it wouldn't be as much of a problem.

Exactly! The only other MMO I've ever played is GW2 and I was baffled to find that I actually have to run to a mailbox to pick up a letter and some credits, both of which (I strongly assume) are being transferred electronically. I realize it's meant to be a timesink (and the Legacy unlock a moneysink), but... why? It's not like I really run to a mailbox the moment I get mail - I pick it up whenever I come across one by chance. Now that I know it's what WoW did, though, at least I understand where the idea comes from.

I think this would be a decent system. EA will live even without the "display Legacy name" unlock for F2Pers. I haven't really had too many problems finding a name for my characters, but it would be nice to be able to use shorter names sometimes. I also agree that it would be nice to have a handle to recongize a player by beyond a single character's name. Of course we would probably see a sudden influx of the same generic names used over and over again. (I can't help but remember that one thread that's been floating around in the last few days. If you've read it, you know the one.)