Erked.

[ItchyThePenguin]

You don't have to. That is not the point. The point was questioning where/how he/she was factually quoting those numbers.

 

I agree with your second sentence as far as say operating income. But I ask you, and it is your opinion, do you think they have payed off their investment?

 

May I inquire as to what "investment" you are referring to?

[DAMossimo]

When they finally take away the subscription option completely, then worry. Then they can pull the plug whenever they want without worrying about reimbursing anyone.

[TheIrage]

May I inquire as to what "investment" you are referring to?

 

The amount of money invested on making the game.

 

Here, i found an old link that cites that number at about $ 200M (quick google though)

 

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/games/star-wars-the-old-republic-the-story-behind-a-galactic-gamble/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=63378#/0

Edited March 15, 2013 by TheIrage
taking ? as to not be disrespectful

[Belacose]

I want to note that the design philosophy behind this Reputation was to specifically thank the players who purchase the best-selling items on the Cartel Market, the packs.

 

This quite possibly is the funniest thing I have ever read in these here forums.

[Blackavaar]

When they finally take away the subscription option completely, then worry. Then they can pull the plug whenever they want without worrying about reimbursing anyone.

 

That's unnecessary. They can pull the plug at any moment and they don't have to reimburse a goddamn one of us. It's in the EULA.

 

[Eillack]

Fair point. I forgot about the ship components. I can see the P2W argument from that, but it's rather indirect. The upgraded ship components didn't directly translate to an advantage over other players. As for the crystals, I never really considered them to be "P2W". Sure, it provides an advantage if you're below 50, but it's a pretty minute advantage and one that decreases as your level increases and levels off at level 50.

 

True enough, but wasn't this always the case ever since the Cartel Market entered the game? You either had enough coins to buy the packs to get what you wanted or you had the in game credits to buy what you wanted from someone else. In some cases (Revan's Mask for example) you would need millions of credits just to purchase one item.

 

I wouldn't really compare the introduction of the CM to the new CM.

 

I'm saying that because most of the playerbase got up to 3000+ coins and the packs at the time did not contain Reputation, nor the other types of things that are in the CM now.

 

So far on Jedi Covenant the lowest price I've seen for 1 unit of the new cartel packs was 400k; other determined it would take almost 80-100mil to hit cap if 250k was the lowest - that there shows and backs up the "social class" concept I posted yesterday.

[Talon_strikes]

This thread needs to die already...

[Quraswren]

This thread needs to die already...

 

Not likely to happen. Bw's corporate rep leveling system pissed off enough gamers to keep these threads alive as well as it spreading out to other gaming sites and their forums. As it already has.

 

When you make a move this bad, turn in a staple MMO feature into a rather devious cash grab so players can level up their corporate rep ladder with cash. You can expect a gaming company gets some major amounts of negativity.

[HanStyle]

I m one of them, really hate the Pay to win cosmetic system. Not every p2w item is p2w the pvp. I will defend the game on any other subject, but this is just horrid

[DarthTHC]

Not likely to happen. Bw's corporate rep leveling system pissed off enough gamers to keep these threads alive as well as it spreading out to other gaming sites and their forums. As it already has.

 

When you make a move this bad, turn in a staple MMO feature into a rather devious cash grab so players can level up their corporate rep ladder with cash. You can expect a gaming company gets some major amounts of negativity.

 

Still not understanding what is devious about this rep.

 

It's all out there in the open, plain for all to see. If you want the rep you will spend ~$800 in the cash shop or transfer tens of millions of credits via GTN to someone who spent ~$800 in the cash shop.

 

Seems pretty clear, plain, easy to understand. No deception. No ulterior motives. Heck, no ingame advantage even.

 

If people lack the self-discipline to avoid spending the equivalent of a house payment or 4 car payments on a douchey title and an ugly crown, well, there's no deception on EA's part getting their money. That's on the buyer.

[DarthZak]

Im surprised by the lack of communication by the Community Managers, or should I say by the lack of communication by the PR people since they dictate what is said on these matters.

 

Eric, Amber and Courtney can you please relay the message that an open dialogue with your fans creates a much tighter community? Especially with things like these, there is enough open debate with opponents and proponents that this should be discussed further.

There are some great ideas in this thread that can alleviate a lot of the anger on this topic, this will save you a handful of subs (which dont matter) but also a lot of future sales (I for one dont play to buy any EA game in the future)

Edited March 15, 2013 by DarthZak

[Lostpenguins]

that there shows and backs up the "social class" concept I posted yesterday.

Lol... "social class". Sorry, but my guild doesn't invite on how high your reputation standings are. They care if you know how to play your class, get along with others, and if you can get out of fire, while knowing and aiming for BiS gear.

 

I've never seen any sort of player interaction in this game where people made a decision based on someone else's cosmetic appearance.

 

Wait, sorry, I'm wrong there. I have heard from healers for players to put their pets away as it was stealing heals at one point (before BW fixed it).

 

Lol again at "social class".

[Quraswren]

Still not understanding what is devious about this rep.

 

It's all out there in the open, plain for all to see. If you want the rep you will spend ~$800 in the cash shop or transfer tens of millions of credits via GTN to someone who spent ~$800 in the cash shop.

 

Seems pretty clear, plain, easy to understand. No deception. No ulterior motives. Heck, no ingame advantage even.

 

If people lack the self-discipline to avoid spending the equivalent of a house payment or 4 car payments on a douchey title and an ugly crown, well, there's no deception on EA's part getting their money. That's on the buyer.

 

For me, it is the way they took a staple game mechanic, the way gamers have played MMO for a number of years now and mutated it onto a version that plays on what gamers like to do, play the game, finish out content, grind rep levels for fluff and bonuses but added in the cash option to buy rep.

 

I consider it a little devious. It would be like added the same cash option to level any rep. Sure you don't need to pay, it's fluff content.

But it does play off the innate "want" of gamers to actually play the game and complete things in a game but adding that buy option. Doesn't matter that it can be bought with in game credits cause the cost is outside any real achievable level as well as the time it would take to acquire the coins through a subscription. It's the devious nature in it's creation and just bad for gaming in general for the length of the game and to hear each shipment will now have a new rep. level to grind makes it more devious in it's cash grab.

 

It's a rather skillful use of underhanded tactics to achieve a goal. It's an intelligent move on a business level but the gamers will suffer for it in the long run. I'm not talking about being deceptive, I'm talking about being devious.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Quraswren

[Andryah]

So far on Jedi Covenant the lowest price I've seen for 1 unit of the new cartel packs was 400k;

 

It's the nature of supply and demand on a brand new shiny. Give it another week or two and people will be undercutting each other left and right and listing the 24packs for less then 4M gc's. It will settle out at around 250K a pack, so do your math based on that. Oh, and you can't actually calculate because of RNG as there are different rep reward tokens, green, blue, and purple and they each give different rep.

 

And in the end... if you follow the yellow brick road.... you get some fluffy bunny slippers you can call your own. Wooo Hooo.

 

You buy early, you get scalped. Don't be a victim in a free market economy.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Andryah

[Andryah]

For me, it is the way they took a staple game mechanic, the way gamers have played

 

It's not a staple game mechanic as it does not meet the criteria of acutal faction rep. It gives nothing of competitive value in game. It's perky, braggy, faux-rep.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Andryah

[DarthTHC]

For me, it is the way they took a staple game mechanic, the way gamers have played MMO for a number of years now and mutated it onto a version that plays on what gamers like to do, play the game, finish out content, grind rep levels for fluff and bonuses but added in the cash option to buy rep.

 

I consider it a little devious. It would be like added the same cash option to level any rep. Sure you don't need to pay, it's fluff content.

But it does play off the innate "want" of gamers to actually play the game and complete things in a game but adding that buy option. Doesn't matter that it can be bought with in game credits cause the cost is outside any real achievable level as well as the time it would take to acquire the coins through a subscription. It's the devious nature in it's creation and just bad for gaming in general for the length of the game and to hear each shipment will now have a new rep. level to grind makes it more devious in it's cash grab.

 

It's a rather skillful use of underhanded tactics to achieve a goal. It's an intelligent move on a business level but the gamers will suffer for it in the long run. I'm not talking about being deceptive, I'm talking about being devious.

 

I'm right there with you in that is plays into gamers' desires. If a company were to produce a game that did not attempt to play into gamers' desires, that company wouldn't exist for very long would it? I mean, why put out a game that contained a bunch of stuff gamers didn't want to do?

 

Where I disagree is that there is anything underhanded or devious going on. The path to the rep is crystal clear. Gamers can choose to pursue the path or not, knowing full well ahead of time what it takes to get there.

 

No deception. Nothing underhanded. No tricks. No hidden extras or fees. Everything perfectly, 100% open and honest. Which really is exactly the opposite of what I normally expect from EA, which fascinates me.

[Mowermanx]

For me, it is the way they took a staple game mechanic, the way gamers have played MMO for a number of years now and mutated it onto a version that plays on what gamers like to do, play the game, finish out content, grind rep levels for fluff and bonuses but added in the cash option to buy rep.

 

I consider it a little devious. It would be like added the same cash option to level any rep. Sure you don't need to pay, it's fluff content.

But it does play off the innate "want" of gamers to actually play the game and complete things in a game but adding that buy option. Doesn't matter that it can be bought with in game credits cause the cost is outside any real achievable level as well as the time it would take to acquire the coins through a subscription. It's the devious nature in it's creation and just bad for gaming in general for the length of the game and to hear each shipment will now have a new rep. level to grind makes it more devious in it's cash grab.

 

It's a rather skillful use of underhanded tactics to achieve a goal. It's an intelligent move on a business level but the gamers will suffer for it in the long run. I'm not talking about being deceptive, I'm talking about being devious.

 

The only thing underhanded is the drivel you and your ilk are sprouting.

It was said why it was put in, and if you dont believe that, thats ok, but the way people are carrying on is nothing short of ridiculous, petulant child comes to mind.

[Quraswren]

It's not a staple game mechanic as it does not meet the criteria of acutal faction rep. It gives nothing of competitive value in game. It's perky, braggy, faux-rep/

 

Most rep in this game is that, rep grinds in many games have been that. There is little difference now. Bw took a staple game mechanic and deviously changed it for a cash grab playing off a habitual gaming habit gamers are known to have. Doesn't matter the end prize since it's fluff but it reeks of being devious.

 

Im surprised by the lack of communication by the Community Managers, or should I say by the lack of communication by the PR people since they dictate what is said on these matters.

 

Eric, Amber and Courtney can you please relay the message that an open dialogue with your fans creates a much tighter community? Especially with things like these, there is enough open debate with opponents and proponents that this should be discussed further.

There are some great ideas in this thread that can alleviate a lot of the anger on this topic, this will save you a handful of subs (which dont matter) but also a lot of future sales (I for one dont play to buy any EA game in the future)

 

They really don't need to talk about it anymore to be honest. Eric explained who was more important to them, that this was indeed a buy your rep leveling system and it's being heavily pushed with the release of the recent video.

 

I wouldn't expect much out of them other than a standard, "We are listening" thread.

[Lostpenguins]

For me, it is the way they took a staple game mechanic, the way gamers have played MMO for a number of years now and mutated it onto a version that plays on what gamers like to do, play the game, finish out content, grind rep levels for fluff and bonuses but added in the cash option to buy rep.

 

I consider it a little devious. It would be like added the same cash option to level any rep. Sure you don't need to pay, it's fluff content.

But it does play off the innate "want" of gamers to actually play the game and complete things in a game but adding that buy option. Doesn't matter that it can be bought with in game credits cause the cost is outside any real achievable level as well as the time it would take to acquire the coins through a subscription. It's the devious nature in it's creation and just bad for gaming in general for the length of the game and to hear each shipment will now have a new rep. level to grind makes it more devious in it's cash grab.

 

It's a rather skillful use of underhanded tactics to achieve a goal. It's an intelligent move on a business level but the gamers will suffer for it in the long run. I'm not talking about being deceptive, I'm talking about being devious.

Sure, you can say it's enticing all the time. But you're crying as if it's something new? People:

- Bought the CE for bonus stuff

- Bought the digital download for bonus stuff

- Bought the Razer for a green crystal

- Bought digital pets from WoW

- Mounts from Rift

- All sorts of fluff from this game

 

You act like companies don't use shiny objects to entice consumers to pay. There's nothing game-breaking about this pay for rep thing. It doesn't imbalance game mechanics and if you simply cannot enjoy this game because one fluff bar isn't filled, then that's your problem.

 

They really don't need to talk about it anymore to be honest. Eric explained who was more important to them, that this was indeed a buy your rep leveling system and it's being heavily pushed with the release of the recent video.

You're inferring something Eric never said. If you really can't think straight on this, then there's no hope for you. All you want to do is twist their words to fit your agenda. That's actually sort of sad about the world of denial you're putting yourself in over a rep bar.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Lostpenguins

[DarthTHC]

Most rep in this game is that, rep grinds in many games have been that. There is little difference now. Bw took a staple game mechanic and deviously changed it for a cash grab playing off a habitual gaming habit gamers are known to have. Doesn't matter the end prize since it's fluff but it reeks of being devious.

 

Again, why's it devious? Why do you keep using that word?

 

Here's what Dictionary.com has to say about that word, "devious":

 

1. departing from the most direct way; circuitous; indirect
   
2. without definite course; vagrant: a devious current.
   
3. departing from the proper or accepted way
   
4. not straightforward; shifty or crooked
   

 

Are you trying to use definition 3? If so, you're going to have a tough time getting consensus on the definition of "the proper or accepted way". And what they're doing with this rep is clearly not definitions 1, 2, or 4.

 

If people are so out-of-control that they can't choose for themselves whether or not to spend $800 to get this rep, that is an indictment of the players, not EA.

[Quraswren]

Sure, you can say it's enticing all the time. But you're crying as if it's something new? People:

- Bought the CE for bonus stuff

- Bought the digital download for bonus stuff

- Bought the Razer for a green crystal

- Bought digital pets from WoW

- Mounts from Rift

- All sorts of fluff from this game

 

You act like companies don't use shiny objects to entice consumers to pay. There's nothing game-breaking about this pay for rep thing. It doesn't imbalance game mechanics and if you simply cannot enjoy this game because one fluff bar isn't filled, then that's your problem.

 

And none of that was tied to a game mechanic that is so staple in games that gamer will go to great lengths playing a game to achieve. Insane title comes to mind. How pissed would gamers have been if that could have been bought?

 

Some buy to rep level sytem that turned gamer habits into a joke cash grab is a little different.

 

SNIP.....

 

I'm not talking about deception. I'm taking being devious in nature and this is what it is. It's a rather underhanded move to get a cash grab that does play off gamer habits. To me thats a little devious.

 

just having it in the market to buy is one thing and entirely different. Adding it into the game they way it was done through rep is devious.

 

I use devious cause this is the defination:

 

de·vi·ous

/ˈdēvēəs/

Adjective

 

Showing a skillful use of underhanded tactics to achieve goals.

 

(of a route or journey) Longer and less direct than the most straightforward way.

 

This move is a littel underhanded, most marketing moves are devious in nature There intelligent and devious, not deceitful.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Quraswren

[Andryah]

Most rep in this game is that, rep grinds in many games have been that. There is little difference now. Bw took a staple game mechanic and deviously changed it for a cash grab playing off a habitual gaming habit gamers are known to have. Doesn't matter the end prize since it's fluff but it reeks of being devious.

 

Actually most rep in MMOs is designed to give meaninful rewards such as one or more useful (in terms of actual game pay) or even BiS items.

 

The only thing Bioware has done here is be marketing clever about giving non-meaningful (unless braggin rights make or break your game play, is that the problem for you??) reputation path for CCM customers who buy a particular product. A product by the way that injects a lot of interesting and wanted items into the in game free market economy.

 

I tell you what... come back to me when they add Pay-2-get-BiS-Ops-Gear... and I am willing to give you some points for objectivity. But until then... all I am seeing here is classic petty whining and complaining about something that if you don't like it you really will never miss it, nor do you need it to be best in PvE or PvP (which is what MMOs are about).

Edited March 15, 2013 by Andryah

[DarthTHC]

I'm not talking about deception. I'm taking being devious in nature and this is what it is. It's a rather underhanded move to get a cash grab that does play off gamer habits. To me thats a little devious.

 

just having it in the market to buy is one thing and entirely different. Adding it into the game they way it was done through rep is devious.

 

Again, what's devious about it? They're not hiding anything. What's your definition of devious?

 

Tell us that you don't like it 'til you're blue in the face, that's great. I'll agree that a lot of people don't like it.

 

But it's not devious. Believe me, I 'm the first person to call EA out when they do something "devious".

 

EDIT:

 

I see you've edited your post to now call it "underhanded". Again, there is absolutely no deception, nor any compulsion to obtain the rep by attaching it to ingame statistical or time advantages. It's not underhanded either.

 

If you don't like it, you don't like it. That doesn't mean EA is trying to "trick" anyone into spending money for this feature.

Edited March 15, 2013 by DarthTHC

[AlienEyeTX]

Again, why's it devious? Why do you keep using that word?

 

Here's what Dictionary.com has to say about that word, "devious":

 

 

 

Are you trying to use definition 3? If so, you're going to have a tough time getting consensus on the definition of "the proper or accepted way". And what they're doing with this rep is clearly not definitions 1, 2, or 4.

 

If people are so out-of-control that they can't choose for themselves whether or not to spend $800 to get this rep, that is an indictment of the players, not EA.

 

Exactly. People are just being ridiculous about the whole thing. If you don't like it, don't do it.

[Andryah]

Again, what's devious about it? They're not hiding anything. What's your definition of devious?

 

Tell us that you don't like it 'til you're blue in the face, that's great. I'll agree that a lot of people don't like it.

 

But it's not devious. Believe me, I 'm the first person to call EA out when they do something "devious".

 

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that for him it is considered devious becasue they did not review it with him personally six months in advance of releasing the perk and they did not gain his sign-off on it before they moved forward.

 

I think it's a control issue...ie: "don't put anything into an MMO I play without my consent!...how dare you!" Misplaced sense of power and importance IMO, but different candy for different people I guess.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Andryah