Credit limit unlock

[Mdgshorty]

Honestly, the suggestion for tokens and something similar has been suggested before. I honestly do love the idea of offering tokens for sub time in SWTOR for $20. WOW, Archeage, Rift and other games are already doing this.

 

Here is the reason why. There are some players that are either just logging in for operations or PVP which is usually a day or two per week. The prices of the passes on the GTN have been getting ridiculous. The highest I have seen them going for is 15 Million.

 

I would suggest they offer the token, but they would have to be bought through the website like subs are but when they are put on the GTN, there is a set price that is set by Bioware. The item would be able to be picked up through the cartel market. I do suggest that we keep them to be buyable by subs and preferred status players. They should have had to contribute something in the past to be able to buy them. I know you may be asking how preferred status players will be able to purchase them. That is easy. They would be able to purchase them from their escrow without having to buy an escrow unlock. Nothing else would be able to be purchased in the same manner.

[Ratajack]

Honestly, the suggestion for tokens and something similar has been suggested before. I honestly do love the idea of offering tokens for sub time in SWTOR for $20. WOW, Archeage, Rift and other games are already doing this.

 

How does the GTN price for a "token" get set? IMO, if BW were going to sell "tokens", the price should be controlled by BW, similar to the Blizzard sets the price of the WoW token. I do not think players should have any overt control on pricing.

 

Here is the reason why. There are some players that are either just logging in for operations or PVP which is usually a day or two per week. The prices of the passes on the GTN have been getting ridiculous. The highest I have seen them going for is 15 Million.

 

What should BW charge for a "token" if they do go ahead and sell them?

 

I'm figuring they would not be cheap, considering how easy it is to make credits in this game.

 

If a single OPS pass for a ONE WEEK access to OPS is going for 15 million, then something that would give a player UNLIMITED access to ALL parts of the game should be worth AT LEAST 4 times that. I think that a good starting point would be in the neighborhood of 50 million credits.

 

Remember, also, that we are talking about nothing less than "legalized" (BW condoned) credit purchasing. The price would have to be high enough that players felt they were getting a much better deal "buying credits" from BW than from the credit sellers.

 

 

I would suggest they offer the token, but they would have to be bought through the website like subs are but when they are put on the GTN, there is a set price that is set by Bioware. The item would be able to be picked up through the cartel market. I do suggest that we keep them to be buyable by subs and preferred status players. They should have had to contribute something in the past to be able to buy them. I know you may be asking how preferred status players will be able to purchase them. That is easy. They would be able to purchase them from their escrow without having to buy an escrow unlock. Nothing else would be able to be purchased in the same manner.

 

 

The credit cap is there for a reason. If a preferred (or F2P) player wants to access credits in excess of that credit cap, then they can either SUBSCRIBE or purchase an escrow. No F2P or preferred player should get a "free" bypass of the credit cap. Remember that being preferred does NOT mean former subscriber. In fact, preferred player means NOTHING except that you can say that person once spent as little as $5. I do not think that a single $5 purchase warrants being given a FREE credit cap bypass.

 

You can say "but that preferred player is going to subscribe. That's why he should get a FREE bypass of the credit cap." The fact remains that until he actually subscribes he is still either a F2P or a preferred status player and is subject to that credit cap.

 

That preferred (or F2P) player would only need to purchase that subscription one time if he truly planned on continuing to subscribe via those tokens, right?

[AbsolutGrndZero]

I also play DC Universe Online, where I am not at this time a subscriber. 350k credit cap? I wish it was that high. It's 2000 in that game. I hit that cap in twenty minutes. Spend it all on the little stuff I can actually afford, then twenty minutes later I hit the cap again.

 

So anyone that thinks big bad EAware is screwing you with a 350k credit cap, check out a few other F2P games, then if you don't' come back with a new appreciation for this game's generous 350k credit cap, then you just are looking for reasons to hate EA.

[mudtech]

I also play DC Universe Online, where I am not at this time a subscriber. 350k credit cap? I wish it was that high. It's 2000 in that game. I hit that cap in twenty minutes. Spend it all on the little stuff I can actually afford, then twenty minutes later I hit the cap again.

 

So anyone that thinks big bad EAware is screwing you with a 350k credit cap, check out a few other F2P games, then if you don't' come back with a new appreciation for this game's generous 350k credit cap, then you just are looking for reasons to hate EA.

I was just about to say the same thing, until I noticed this was a 3+ year old thread.

 

No one who has ever played DCUO as a non-sub would complain about the cap in SWTOR.

 

Mainly the only issue with the cap in SWTOR is with the GTN and people overpricing things, especially things that only non-subs have use for. SH unlocks are a pain too but not to much of an issue.

[DieAlteHexe]

How about making a token you can buy (non-transferable, don't want to see them on the GTN for a ridiculously expensive price) that gives you unlimited access to your money for a month. We could throw in free access to PvP and OPs with it, let people get a full sample of the entire game.

 

Maybe make it $15, I think that's about a fair amount.

 

Tricksy.

[shadowtornado]

There was a interview with a few Dev's about this issue and they did say they are watching the situation and they may bump the credit limit or just remove it all together based on they data they collect.

 

And here we are, 3 years later, with nothing having happened whatsoever.

[PetFish]

What do you expect? They didn't say anywhere that they were doing it, only that they were looking at it, which means it's exactly how they want it to be at this point in time so somehow being mad at them for not changing it is silly.

[wrmrstacrdwower]

Want more credits instead of them hiding in a locked box? Pay a monthly fee like anyone else - 350k will be more than enough for anyone who is 'trying' the game or 'leveling' - anymore than 350k implies you're playing end game stuff and should sub for the full benefit.

 

I agree. People should have to sub so they have access to market place items through farming content in a Free to Play game, content rewards during the story campaign content, and all of the other locks in place that do nothing but attempt to strong arm you into a subscription for a game that as of Episode 13, which is all of 1 1/2 hours of game play content, is bugged so that if you don't have a subscription to have early access to episode 13 you can't enter you personal phase in the Alliance base if you have a Hylo Visz alert turn in. because why have a functioning Free To Play game, right?

[CrazyCT]

Just buy the token - it gives you free access to all your money for a month (also gives you access to PvP warzones and OPs to try them out) and at the moment they are giving you 500cc free with it. You might not have seen it cause you can't get it on the GTN or Cartel Market, you have to go HERE

 

I don't know about other countries, but it's only £8.99 here in the UK.

Edited May 8, 2016 by CrazyCT

[nanamaryjj]

Whilst it might be frustrating for those that don't sub, to have a credit limit

You need to realise, that alot of people sub purely to bypass that credit limit

So increasing it too far would result in BW actively losing subs

Got a few friends ingame who only sub due to credits

 

The perks outside credit limit for subs are so outdated nowadays with how fast leveling is

Removing another reason to sub would hit the game hard

[kylandau]

I think people are overlooking the fact that a lot of people don't subscribe because they can't. $15 is a lot of money to a lot of people, I for one can't maintain a subscription. I get one here and there when I can, but it's impossible to maintain. For the people who are acting all superior, what is wrong with you? You're not special because you pay to play a game. Maybe consider not everyone's well enough off to afford a constant subscription.

 

Either remove the level cap or offer the ability to BUY a removal of the cap like other games do, it's not that difficult. Probably the latter option is the better one for your business model, I guarantee you I'd buy it.

 

I also saw someone claim that you don't need credits unless you're working on endgame stuff. Categorically untrue. What about people who want to buy things on the GTN? The prices are already way out of line as it is, but that's the same in EVERY game with something like that. What about people who want to work on their stronghold but can't because opening some rooms are 450,000 Credits or 2,500,00 credits?

[SaerethDL]

I think people are overlooking the fact that a lot of people don't subscribe because they can't. $15 is a lot of money to a lot of people, I for one can't maintain a subscription. I get one here and there when I can, but it's impossible to maintain. For the people who are acting all superior, what is wrong with you? You're not special because you pay to play a game. Maybe consider not everyone's well enough off to afford a constant subscription.

 

Either remove the level cap or offer the ability to BUY a removal of the cap like other games do, it's not that difficult. Probably the latter option is the better one for your business model, I guarantee you I'd buy it.

 

I also saw someone claim that you don't need credits unless you're working on endgame stuff. Categorically untrue. What about people who want to buy things on the GTN? The prices are already way out of line as it is, but that's the same in EVERY game with something like that. What about people who want to work on their stronghold but can't because opening some rooms are 450,000 Credits or 2,500,00 credits?

 

I suggested removing the subscription fee for an optional subscription and make the rest of the game buy 2 play with one time fees on new expansions. Still have the cartel shop and get rid of most of the f2p restrictions. It would incentivize them to make new content for the game if they want to make even more revenue from the players. I believe the current rate of content we get doesn't warrant a 15/month subscription fee even though we have the ability to afford it. You can also have an optional subscription fee if you want to support the game and get some cool perks like cartel allowance, monthly pets,mounts, and outfit rewards, additional bonus xp, and a few other non-p2w bonuses. I actually think it would bring in a lot more players to the game and keep them around longer.. they may even make more money doing it this way. Of course last time I suggested this I was completely ridiculed by the community. So whatever.

[Phazonfreak]

I think people are overlooking the fact that a lot of people don't subscribe because they can't. $15 is a lot of money to a lot of people, I for one can't maintain a subscription. I get one here and there when I can, but it's impossible to maintain. For the people who are acting all superior, what is wrong with you? You're not special because you pay to play a game. Maybe consider not everyone's well enough off to afford a constant subscription.

 

I think it has less to do with acting all superior and being special, but more with acknowledging the simple fact that the people who pay to play the game, either by subbing or by spending cash on the Cartel Market or even both, are the ones keeping it afloat and not the ones who don't have the money to do that and still want to play the game without any restrictions. So maybe you should consider that without the ones who pay to play, there would not even be a game to play. This is a luxury entertainment item and not essential human rights.

 

I suggested removing the subscription fee for an optional subscription and make the rest of the game buy 2 play with one time fees on new expansions. Still have the cartel shop and get rid of most of the f2p restrictions. It would incentivize them to make new content for the game if they want to make even more revenue from the players. I believe the current rate of content we get doesn't warrant a 15/month subscription fee even though we have the ability to afford it. You can also have an optional subscription fee if you want to support the game and get some cool perks like cartel allowance, monthly pets,mounts, and outfit rewards, additional bonus xp, and a few other non-p2w bonuses. I actually think it would bring in a lot more players to the game and keep them around longer.. they may even make more money doing it this way. Of course last time I suggested this I was completely ridiculed by the community. So whatever.

 

I don't know about being ridiculed for that sensible suggestion, but it has become quite clear that the business model other games have, and you prefer, is not the one EA and BioWare have created for themselves. They don't care anymore about increasing their subbed player base by competing with the other big Mmorpgs and boast about their active sub count like one other particular company always does. Eric Musco actually told us through the grapevines that it is part of their projection now that some of the players are only subbing from time to time with big breaks in between and some only come back when something new is there to sub for and unlock. This is offset with the Cartel Market as the essential part of the regular cashflow and they seem to be quite happy with the turnover. If anything it is much, much easier and faster to create new cosmetics for the ingame shop than completely new story and endgame content with professionally voiced characters and a convoluted game engine that seems to break with every new thing added to it. I think this is the main reason that they don't adhere to a business model that incentivizes them to create content faster and more often.

Edited May 8, 2020 by Phazonfreak

[kylandau]

I think it has less to do with acting all superior and being special, but more with acknowledging the simple fact that the people who pay to play the game, either by subbing or by spending cash on the Cartel Market or even both, are the ones keeping it afloat and not the ones who don't have the money to do that and still want to play the game without any restrictions. So maybe you should consider that without the ones who pay to play, there would not even be a game to play. This is a luxury entertainment item and not essential human rights.

 

 

 

I don't know about being ridiculed for that sensible suggestion, but it has become quite clear that the business model other games have, and you prefer, is not the one EA and BioWare have created for themselves. They don't care anymore about increasing their subbed player base by competing with the other big Mmorpgs and boast about their active sub count like one other particular company always does. Eric Musco actually told us through the grapevines that it is part of their projection now that some of the players are only subbing from time to time with big breaks in between and some only come back when something new is there to sub for and unlock. This is offset with the Cartel Market as the essential part of the regular cashflow and they seem to be quite happy with the turnover. If anything it is much, much easier and faster to create new cosmetics for the ingame shop than completely new story and endgame content with professionally voiced characters and a convoluted game engine that seems to break with every new thing added to it. I think this is the main reason that they don't adhere to a business model that incentivizes them to create content faster and more often.

 

I do currently subscribe and over the years that I have played the game I have dumped hundreds of dollars into it. I understand perfectly that without the players paying the game wouldn't be around. I support this game, but a lot of the comments I read had people acting superior and being incredibly rude about subscriptions and people who didn't have them. I have suggested that they lower the sub cost to $10/month because that's, to my mind, a more reasonable price for what it gets you.

[xordevoreaux]

I have suggested that they lower the sub cost to $10/month

 

I'm on a fixed income. Trust me. People who don't have $15 a month don't have $10. It's not there to spare.

At the moment, I'm lucky and can afford it. Don't be dismissive of that $5 dollars

 

because that's, to my mind, a more reasonable price for what it gets you

I'd like to know exactly what part of the game quantifies as the $5 you're espousing EA write down in revenue.

Maybe it's the taxis. That's it. We'll get rid of all taxis. That's where the five dollars is.

 

See the problem? Once you start quantifying the game's value on a per-dollar basis, you'll get all sorts of questions just like that: what part of the game constitutes the worth of the sub, doesn't matter the sub is $2, $5, $10, or $100.

 

Good luck on getting consensus on that.

[DarkTergon]

Trust me. People who don't have $15 a month don't have $10. It's not there to spare.

Don't be dismissive of that $5 dollars

.

 

Basically this, if you don't have 15, you probably don't have 10, and have a lot more to worry about than an online sub.

The issue at hand is, if they cut the sub, how much revenue would they loose, and what would they cut, to save costs. Because, at the end of the day, they won't loose the money and keep the same investment, they'll cut back, so that they keep the same profits, just spend less on resources.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love if it were cheaper, but I'd rather keep it as it is, then have even less content, and less support.

[MrParrcheezy]

It would be nice if the credit limit would be removed for F2P and Preferred players, Sure, 1 million for F2P and I'm guessing a littler more for Preferred is nice, but when certain legacy items costs 1.5 million or more it really doesn't help anything.

[TrixxieTriss]

Just make it 2 mil for P2P and 1.5 mil for F2P. I can’t even buy a small shipment of good spice on the Imp fleet for less than 1.2mil these days

[Phazonfreak]

It would be nice if the credit limit would be removed for F2P and Preferred players, Sure, 1 million for F2P and I'm guessing a littler more for Preferred is nice, but when certain legacy items costs 1.5 million or more it really doesn't help anything.

 

I absolutely agree with the suggestion to remove the arbitrary credit limit altogether for both preferred and F2P. I also agree with another suggestion in other threads to be able to buy game time with credits (that will not count towards unlocking and playing the latest expansion/endgame). They can have the harshest restrictions concerning action bars, xp gain, item authorization and being locked out of the endgame, etc. but they should not restrict the credits you can have on one character to buy stuff from other players and the market.

 

For me this is the single most counterintuitive restriction that they created when they implemented the F2P model and I am entirely convinced that it would be benificial for both the player base and BioWare/EA if that restriction was lifted for good.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Phazonfreak

[xordevoreaux]

It would be nice if the credit limit would be removed for F2P and Preferred players, Sure, 1 million for F2P and I'm guessing a littler more for Preferred is nice, but when certain legacy items costs 1.5 million or more it really doesn't help anything.

 

A year from now you'd have to raise it again because prices go up again. If we could graph the general price of items from 2012 to now, it's an ever-upward climb. You're asking for an arms race between credit caps and game inflation.

[Ardrossan]

Most of the people in these forums are down to earth, decent people, there has been no snobbery, if you're seeing that, it's your own issue, and you need to look at your life. You spend a lot of time attacking people on this forum, for no reason other than they disagree with you. You spend more time looking down on others than anyone else here, at this point in time, the best way to deal with this is put you on ignore.

 

I lurk the forum when I'm not subbing and see F2Ps and prefs being spat on frequently. When I have access to the forum, I call it out. Obviously myself and this dude, and likely others, see something you don't, something that makes you uncomfortable. Tone policing aside, I'm guessing it starts with a P and rhymes with village. Rather than denying it or pretending that we're just terrible people, why not reflect on the possibility that we're right?

 

Since I'm going on ignore anyway...you seem to be taking this personally. While this isn't directed at any one person, I gotta say, there really is no need to invent rationalizations for why players should be treated differently based on income.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Ardrossan

[Lodinn]

Had the choice been left to the forum, prefs and F2P would have level 20 limit and a 100k credit limit, and I didn't make up those numbers, they've been seriously suggested by players over the years.

Now it's too late for this but arguably, it could make sense at launch. Sub-only games with a free trial are a very sensible thing, and F2P means Cartel Market and microtransactions everywhere... Which wouldn't be too bad if the universally accessible content like story got more love from the devs.

People vote with their wallets I guess.

[xordevoreaux]

Now it's too late for this but arguably, it could make sense at launch. Sub-only games with a free trial are a very sensible thing, and F2P means Cartel Market and microtransactions everywhere... Which wouldn't be too bad if the universally accessible content like story got more love from the devs.

People vote with their wallets I guess.

 

I believe this game was originally a subscription-only franchise until microtransactions became a thing.

[DarkTergon]

I believe this game was originally a subscription-only franchise until microtransactions became a thing.

 

around abut 1.3 I set up an extra free acc, and as far as I can remember, you could only be on korriban, get to level 10, and have a max of 20k. Not sure about before then though.

[kylandau]

I'm on a fixed income. Trust me. People who don't have $15 a month don't have $10. It's not there to spare.

At the moment, I'm lucky and can afford it. Don't be dismissive of that $5 dollars

 

 

I'd like to know exactly what part of the game quantifies as the $5 you're espousing EA write down in revenue.

Maybe it's the taxis. That's it. We'll get rid of all taxis. That's where the five dollars is.

 

Your subscription gets you the ability to chat freely. It gets you full XP. it gets you $5 in cartel coins a month and it gets you no credit cap as well as full credits from missions and things cost slightly less than a non sub player. Now to my mind that is not a $15 benefit. I am also on a very fixed income, I can only occasionally afford a sub. I get it supports the game and blah blah but for what you get, $15 is too much. $10 while more than even I could afford 100% of the time would allow the devs to feel as though they are being supported and you still getting benefits from it.