WaywardOne Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 << The problem is, Erickson has zero say in whether the game goes free to play or not. He can imply he's against it all he wants, but at the end of the day, the suits in EA above his pay grade will make the call, not him. >> True but how often do they give interviews? And if they were going to push that button Erickson would -have- to be in the loop for as long as he's there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kharnis Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 << The problem is, Erickson has zero say in whether the game goes free to play or not. He can imply he's against it all he wants, but at the end of the day, the suits in EA above his pay grade will make the call, not him. >> True but how often do they give interviews? And if they were going to push that button Erickson would -have- to be in the loop for as long as he's there. Do you remember the now-infamous "Subs have not decreased at all" Erickson quote just before the news of a 400k drop in subs? I wouldn't put much stock in anything he has to say, if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpazCats Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 (edited) Reading comprehension is key: <<It’s (F2P is) not something that BioWare has to think about yet, however. Subscribers are still coming back for more, and fans are still getting excited about new, officially released content. >> He is opposed to the idea and is not entertaining it. What you quoted there was NOT quoted from Erickson, that was what the author of the article wrote... so it is the author's interpretation, and one needs to read the whole paragraph from that link to see it in context. Erickson flat out refused to discuss F2P, which I find odd if Bioware is not even thinking about it. Yes, reading comprehension is key. Edited July 21, 2012 by SpazCats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaywardOne Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 (edited) << What you quoted there was NOT quoted from Erickson, that was what the author of the article wrote... so it is the author's interpretation, and one needs to read the whole paragraph from that link to see it in context. Erickson flat out refused to discuss F2P, which I find odd if Bioware is not even thinking about it. Yes, reading comprehension is key. >> It was also the interviewer that said Erickson refused to discuss "a larger f2p initiative" - it's the interviewer's word choice that you are taking out of context and latching onto. After talking to him, it was the interviewer's interpretation of his position that f2p was not on the table and the interview included more conversations/text than we read. Even Erickson's quote was referencing f2p so he was actually "discussing it". But yes, the interviewer could be wrong, or Erickson could be wrong (or lieing). That's the wondrous thing about conspiracy theories; they need no evidence, just speculation and vague plausibility. But this article is evidence, if not incontrovertable (because nothing was printed and signed by the business owners on the topic), that there are no plans/intentions of making the game f2p anytime soon. The history of EA points to SWTOR not going f2p anytime soon. And the history of MMOs points to SWTOR not going f2p anytime soon (no MMO with close to as many players has gone f2p). Have fun with your doom spirals if that's your thing... Edited July 21, 2012 by WaywardOne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpazCats Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 (edited) It was also the interviewer that said Erickson refused to discuss "a larger f2p initiative" - it's the interviewer's word choice that you are taking out of context and latching onto. After talking to him, it was the interviewer's interpretation of his position that f2p was not on the table and the interview included more conversations/text than we read. Even Erickson's quote was referencing f2p so he was actually "discussing it". But yes, the interviewer could be wrong, or Erickson could be wrong (or lieing). That's the wondrous thing about conspiracy theories; they need no evidence, just speculation and vague plausibility. But this article is evidence, if not incontrovertable (because nothing was printed and signed by the business owners on the topic), that there are no plans/intentions of making the game f2p anytime soon. The history of EA points to SWTOR not going f2p anytime soon. And the history of MMOs points to SWTOR not going f2p anytime soon (no MMO with close to as many players has goon f2p). Have fun with your doom spirals if that's your thing... Look, I see very little interpretation to "On the free-to-play front, Erickson refused to talk about the possibility of a larger free-to-play initiative..." If Bioware was not at least thinking about F2P, why would he completely refuse to discuss it? Maybe Bioware will decide to go with F2P or maybe they won't, but it's pretty obvious they're thinking about it if Erickson does not want to discuss it. But still, that is my interpretation, yes. I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this one. EDIT: Have fun with your doom spirals if that's your thing... BTW, looking at going to F2P is not a "doom spiral". Edited July 21, 2012 by SpazCats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soluss Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Look, I see very little interpretation to "On the free-to-play front, Erickson refused to talk about the possibility of a larger free-to-play initiative..." If Bioware was not at least thinking about F2P, why would he completely refuse to discuss it? Maybe Bioware will decide to go with F2P or maybe they won't, but it's pretty obvious they're thinking about it if Erickson does not want to discuss it. But still, that is my interpretation, yes. I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this one. I agree.... if they werent thinking about it they wouldnt just refuse to discuss it... they would simply deny its going to happen. The fact that a developer wont deny it is pretty much a bad sign that its atleast being discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nysis Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 George zoeller used to be on these boards, the GC of swtor. Now he's gone along with some other executive. The leaders of this game are abandoning ship. This does not bode well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reble-Dog-Squad Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 George zoeller used to be on these boards, the GC of swtor. Now he's gone along with some other executive. The leaders of this game are abandoning ship. This does not bode well The reason why they left is because they made out that the game was doing better than it was and EA sat back and thought that if the game was doing well then they have time to introduce further stuff to the game. but the truth is that the game is not doing as well as they had once thought and now they are getting trimming their ranks in the hope that they might be able to reduce costs associated to the game, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
United_Strafes Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 They'll keep on going on like they have, same thing going on with Mass Effect, all they say is "If you knew what was comming" ya ya Bio PR bull same here at ToR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts