So...how about that free name change for subscribers?

[Logisitcs]

This isn't a matter of whether it cuts it or not. My statements in NO WAY lay judgement on whether or not what they are doing is wrong.

 

What I am doing is giving them the benefit of the doubt for the sake of discussion and trying to reason it out logically.

 

There are three games right now that I could list that have over half a dozen delivery system that are not directly available to folks in the company. One game has this problem due to poor design, the other two due to no need for access...actually that is not accurate. One game shut off access on their side to prevent devs from stealing items from players. It is a secure delivery system.

 

It all depends on their UX plan. The UI is strait forward, but the UX plan can define how the system produces and accesses content. Security also plays a role naturally, as do data layers.

 

So, they may have access or may not. It is not a cut and dry ideal.

 

....did that make your jaw drop as well?

 

Think about it. Why would they design a game system that they didn't have access to or couldn't alter at will? That makes zero sense whatsoever. If this were the case, they would be the most shortsighted, inept MMO devs on the face of the planet. What if something went wrong with a transaction? You're screwed cause Custom Service doesn't have access to the bin?

 

But fine whatever you win. They designed a system where they don't have access to it.

So if there's an exploit or anything goes wrong everyone is SOL

[HoboWithAStick]

They are just holding on to it so that they can make more money off of it. If you'd had a toon name you wanted to change for awhile you are more likely to spend the $ to change it vs if they had it out for 2.1 you would have done it for free. All they needed to do was spend you the name change token on the first toon you logged into after 2.1 and made it bind of lagacy. Do you ever feel that the ideas you come up with just sitting at the computer desk are more thoughout then the whole BW austin team? I'm having one of those moments.

[LordArtemis]

But fine whatever you win. They designed a system where they don't have access to it.

So if there's an exploit or anything goes wrong everyone is SOL

 

Now hold on a second. This isn't a contest. I'm not invalidating your opinion, nor am I stating that there is no doubt in my mind that they do not have access. You may very well be correct.

 

This was directed to your derision of my comment, which I simply demonstrated was not arbitrary or uninformed.

 

There's no need to be so final about it. The discussion is good, I presented some solutions, you want answers, I think we can all be satisfied here.

 

I didn't win. I just clarified my comment and why it does not deserve derision IMO.

 

Your opinion is important and not without merit IMO. By all means, continue your line of thinking....just avoid being predatory next time in your replies. It would be appreciated.

Edited May 25, 2013 by LordArtemis

[DarthTHC]

They are just holding on to it so that they can make more money off of it. If you'd had a toon name you wanted to change for awhile you are more likely to spend the $ to change it vs if they had it out for 2.1 you would have done it for free. All they needed to do was spend you the name change token on the first toon you logged into after 2.1 and made it bind of lagacy. Do you ever feel that the ideas you come up with just sitting at the computer desk are more thoughout then the whole BW austin team? I'm having one of those moments.

 

So you are accusing them of deception in order to collect extra revenue?

[Andryah]

If they're not able to do that then something is wrong with:

a.) The coding behind the CM

 

To date, I have not seen the CM claim box used in this MMO for the purpose defined here. It's not how they grant things out to the player base in this MMO. I know TSW does it that way, but their market was coded that way from day one of launch.

 

The thing is, once again we have armchair judge/jury/executioners passing sentence on Bioware for yet another random impatient complaint about something they have no working inside knowledge of.

 

1) They said it's coming

2) They said it has been delayed from original planned release with 2.1

3) They said it's still coming.

4) Exact release method to players has not been disclosed. For all we know there is a new method of distribution of special content like this that they are working on as part of the release of the feature. You know.. something that gives them the core infrastructure to give out subscriber only rewards without having to sift an account database everytime they want to do so.

 

Frankly, a name change is not the most urgent of things that players need IMO. People have lived without them for a long long time now... they can manage a few more weeks IMO.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Andryah

[Andryah]

They are just holding on to it so that they can make more money off of it. If you'd had a toon name you wanted to change for awhile you are more likely to spend the $ to change it vs if they had it out for 2.1 you would have done it for free.

 

That's absurd.

 

They have said every account gets one free name change. What mentally vaccuous person who needs a name unlock is going to go buy one when it's already been promised in at least two recent offical gold posts? And that it is near, not far far away somewhere in the future.

 

All they needed to do was spend you the name change token on the first toon you logged into after 2.1 and made it bind of lagacy.

 

Unless you have the code and are making this comment on actual first hand knowledge... this statement is preposterous. Have you ever seen anything since release that is issued this way in this MMO?

 

Now, it could just maybe.... maybe.. be what they plan to do, but the new code to let them do it is not working as intended yet.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Andryah

[oJebuso]

Does it. Are you sure about that?

 

 

 

Lack of delivery access can be for security sake. There are a few MMOs on the market right now that restrict delivery access by devs for security reasons...to create a secure delivery system for the user.

 

In one game almost the entire cash shop system is locked out except for listing new items and making adjustments. The only way to get access to the systems code is to pull the code in downtime and work it on another server, then reload it to the frame. There is no direct access from the server into the secure transaction system.

 

At any rate, this is quite a few calories burned in a seemingly silly exchange. Let me summarize.

 

 

....I'm not sure why they are having a problem. Maybe they can't get into the bin.

 

...are you crazy? Of course they can.

 

...Not necessarily. Depends on how it is designed.

 

...That's stupid. Anyone that designs it that way would be stupid.

 

 

 

The back and forth over one small element of the discussion reminds me of ice skating uphill. My dad used to have a saying...dont complain that the water was cold when you just jumped in without checking it first.

 

So maybe you guys should check the water next time before you belittle other community members posts.

 

Let's try to loosen up a bit, shall we?

 

I never once belittled anyone, feel free to point out where.

 

I also don't think its a stretch to say that restricting yourself access to something you created is silly as ****.

[SturmUndSterne]

The reason is much much less sinister than wanting to simply monetize it.

 

Word of mouth directly from the devs at the Cantina Event in Dallas, when the question about name changes was brought up, went something like this:

 

"If we allow instant, no-penalty name changes to everyone in the game, it will lead to a very sharp rise in ninja looting and bad behavior, which could simply be masked by changing a character name five minutes later. We want character name changes to require a financial commitment so that it isn't used to harm the community."

 

Take that for what you will, but their logic makes sense, even if it means you're stuck as XxTinkerbellFairyxX for the time being.

[DarthTHC]

The reason is much much less sinister than wanting to simply monetize it.

 

Word of mouth directly from the devs at the Cantina Event in Dallas, when the question about name changes was brought up, went something like this:

 

"If we allow instant, no-penalty name changes to everyone in the game, it will lead to a very sharp rise in ninja looting and bad behavior, which could simply be masked by changing a character name five minutes later. We want character name changes to require a financial commitment so that it isn't used to harm the community."

 

Take that for what you will, but their logic makes sense, even if it means you're stuck as XxTinkerbellFairyxX for the time being.

 

 

And that quote covers ongoing name changes, probably not the initial one free name change we get PER ACCOUNT. Sure it can be abused but not nearly to the extent the developers are discussing in that quote.

Edited May 25, 2013 by DarthTHC

[Kilora]

I don't understand how they could be having trouble with this....the name change item exists in the CM. Just mail it out via in-game mail to subscribers. People who buy this "it's complicated" bs are just kidding themselves.

 

You have no logic here.

 

Your ignorance doesn't mean they can't be having trouble. You realize that there are financial laws and regulations that deal with handing out paid services for free? Do you realize that the CM wasn't developed with the idea of giving out free anything?

 

People like you, who know absolutely nothing about the system they are working with, should probably bite their tongue to avoid making themselves look like ignorant ******s.

[Aelther]

they are having problems with it,they'll release it as soon as they can.

 

So they can sell it without problems, but they have problems giving a free one.... yeah right... If it was the other way around, maybe I'd believe it.

[Andryah]

So they can sell it without problems, but they have problems giving a free one.... yeah right... If it was the other way around, maybe I'd believe it.

 

Two different methods of delivery.

 

It's the delivery method, not the rename mechanism, that is the problem here. Honestly, I would have thought that this would be obvious.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Andryah

[DarthTHC]

Two different methods of delivery.

 

It's the delivery method, not the rename mechanism, that is the problem here. Honestly, I would have thought that this would be obvious.

 

You're talking to the same crowd that voted a gaming company worst company in America 2 years running.

 

Notions like "obvious" and "rational" have no place here.

[Andryah]

You're talking to the same crowd that voted a gaming company worst company in America 2 years running.

 

Notions like "obvious" and "rational" have no place here.

 

Well.....you definitely pwned me there DarthTHC.

 

But I shall sally forth on my Shetland Pony in the face of overwhelming odds.

[schmel]

That would be an easy solution right there. Everyone gets however many free coins a rename costs.

 

The thing I see my (**** retentive) managers, whom I imagine the BWEA managers resemble, saying to that is, "How do we know they'll use it on a rename like we want them to?" To which I'd point, laugh, and go back to wasting my time figuring out how to solve a technical problem that I just solved via logic but my managers shot down because they are irrational and like to waste developer hours.

 

But I digress...

I absolutely understand where you're coming from and think that's a very important point to clarify. I'm not frustrated with the developers or our wonderful community team, I'm frustrated with whoever is managing this game. I'm frustrated with the company, not its employees.

[DarthBrundleFLY]

The best solution then would have been to delay the paid version of name changes as well until the bugs were ironed out of free subscriber token was worked out. Simple.

[schmel]

I'm a big believer that you should never chalk up to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity or incompetence. In this case not the incompetence of the developers--who I'm sure are quite competent--but that of their managers, who, like DarthTHC's manager and so many other managers around the world, often aren't. My guess at this point--and it's just a guess--is that the developers are capable of coding the name change AND that Bioware is not maliciously withholding. I bet that the developers were simply told by their bosses not to work on the name change (for NO reason. just random acts of management) and to work on something else instead. But obviously the community team couldn't SAY that if that were the case. I could definitely see some sort of Dilbert-esque*** exchange like the following:

 

Dev: Hey, I'm going to go ahead and code that name change now.

Manager: No, no, players are all upset about bugs. I want you fixing this bug I heard about.

Dev: ok, but I could do both, it wouldn't take long.

Manager: I said no. Fix the bug and ignore the name change.

Dev: But... Oh nevermind.

 

But I am definitely in the realm of pure speculation at this point.

 

***http://thedilbertstore.com/images/products/72/65322-311.jpg?1249991530

Edited May 26, 2013 by schmel

[HoboWithAStick]

So you are accusing them of deception in order to collect extra revenue?

 

Of course, they did it with 2.1 as well.

 

You can't tell me that they needed the extra 4 weeks after 2.0 came out. Of course they didn't and all that stuff has prob been done for a long time but launching it alone rather then combined with 2.0 gives it the spotlight meaning more people will pay attention to it rather then it get lost as a side feature. Remember cathar were first brought up e3 of last year and from the video they showed they were not even improved since. I'm sure they were done a long time ago they just waited till they could put them in the spotlight and cash in.

[DarthTHC]

Of course, they did it with 2.1 as well.

 

You can't tell me that they needed the extra 4 weeks after 2.0 came out. Of course they didn't and all that stuff has prob been done for a long time but launching it alone rather then combined with 2.0 gives it the spotlight meaning more people will pay attention to it rather then it get lost as a side feature. Remember cathar were first brought up e3 of last year and from the video they showed they were not even improved since. I'm sure they were done a long time ago they just waited till they could put them in the spotlight and cash in.

 

So then here's the question for you and I guess for anyone who honestly thinks that:

 

WHY are you paying them still?

 

I mean, I absolutely refuse to spend money into companies that clearly behave unethically. I go so far as to use tools on my Smart Phone to tell me if products I'm buying contribute to any of the organizations I find distasteful.

 

If I thought for a hot second that BWEA was purposely being dishonest, I'd be gone, never look back.

[Rosiett]

The best solution then would have been to delay the paid version of name changes as well until the bugs were ironed out of free subscriber token was worked out. Simple.

So you believe that having NO name change available at all would be an improvement and get fewer complaints? Are you reading the same forums I am?

[HoboWithAStick]

So then here's the question for you and I guess for anyone who honestly thinks that:

 

WHY are you paying them still?

 

I mean, I absolutely refuse to spend money into companies that clearly behave unethically. I go so far as to use tools on my Smart Phone to tell me if products I'm buying contribute to any of the organizations I find distasteful.

 

If I thought for a hot second that BWEA was purposely being dishonest, I'd be gone, never look back.

 

I still play this game because of the guild I'm in. Basically all I do at this point is raid, I promised myself to stick around at least till NM modes came out and clear those. The game itself has its flaws yes but its still a good game. What bioware/EA are doing however is not okay. But the next big thing is almost here, wildstar and ESO are both coming out this year and I'm sure blizzard is showing us what is up next for them this year as well too. Once those games come out Bioware can make all the cartel packs, deceive their customer base and hold off on content launches as much as they would like.

[LordArtemis]

I just have to ask...do you think that accusing Bioware of deliberately being dishonest for the sake of greed is going to get you what you seek? I am assuming you seek the name change and not a loss of subscribers over this.

 

I think this has more to do with seeing the name change feature available, not wanting to play for it knowing it might be a waste. If that is, in fact, the case...well why don't you say that?

[Aelther]

Two different methods of delivery.

 

It's the delivery method, not the rename mechanism, that is the problem here. Honestly, I would have thought that this would be obvious.

 

I know that, but if they can make payable rename work there is no way they can't make a free one. Send each subscriber a token and be done with it. They manage to send mail with rewards all the time, but when it comes to free cm stuff they suddenly have problems. Yeah right. They simply expect to push this off long enough for people to forget about it or get tired of waiting for it and buy it.

 

You're talking to the same crowd that voted a gaming company worst company in America 2 years running.

 

Notions like "obvious" and "rational" have no place here.

 

I never voted EA worst company, and I do not even live in America. Voting a game publisher a worst company in America is stupid, when compared to companies like Mcdonalds and stuff. However they are still one of the worst video game publishers. They only care about money, they have no passion for games, nor do they care about keeping promises.

 

I've been a CE sub since day one, never unsubbed for even a day, in hopes that eventually this game will improve. But so far things have only been getting worse and worse. I'm not sure how many middle fingers I can take any more for staying subbed...

Edited May 26, 2013 by Aelther

[Godlymuppet]

Imagine I run a business and I want to send a "$5 off your next purchase" coupon to everyone who's ever purchased anything from me. Imagine I have a database of all the purchases ever made.

 

Now imagine I create a query to get that list of everyone who's ever bought anything.

 

But there's a problem in it. Instead of sending one per buyer, it sends one per order.

 

For anyone who bought from me only once, that's great. For people who've bought from me 20 times, that's not so great. It's going to cause me to exceed my marketing budget - what I've been authorized to "give away".

 

Now imagine that my business is a game and the coupon I want to give away is one per account... but it actually turns out my software is trying to give away one per character.

 

Is it the end of the world if I let that happen? Probably not. The players would probably love it.

 

But my managers wouldn't. They'd probably fire me for giving away somewhere between twice and 12 times the freebies they've authorized.

 

That's just one possible scenario and probably not the right one since it seems easy to fix.

 

But if their goal is one per account, not one per SERVER per account, THEN how do they figure out who to give it to? And what if you want to use it on a character and SERVER they don't put it on?

 

There ARE logistics involved, and they may not be easy fixes.

 

One thing is certain: They are NOT holding back on the free name changes just to screw with you, me, or anyone else. And if you honestly think that's their motivation, continuing to pay them money is a fool's gamble.

 

Your trying to be clever but failing badly. They can easily see who was a subscriber at 2.1 and send those players a cert. it's how they awarded cc at the launch of free to play and how my account gets a set amount of items for each character I create.

 

Also it's a totally sound business decision to delay awarding the certs, to cash in on impatient people. It's not illegal to do that, but it is morally wrong. Also do give me any if you ran a business crap, I'm a professional business analyst, so I have seen practices like this quite a few times. Running a business does not automatically mean you care about your customers, just that you care about profits, see the Starbucks tax issue for evidence.

[SkepticShockwave]

I just have to ask...do you think that accusing Bioware of deliberately being dishonest for the sake of greed is going to get you what you seek? I am assuming you seek the name change and not a loss of subscribers over this.

 

I think this has more to do with seeing the name change feature available, not wanting to play for it knowing it might be a waste. If that is, in fact, the case...well why don't you say that?

 

Its true though. They shouldn't advertise things as fact unless they can actually do it. Well they can do it right now, Their probably waiting to see how many subscribers will actually buy it with real money. Clever.