Hate to see another mass exodus.

[curtkram]

first question, what would be best for players of the game, and why?

 

a) a modest charge to move your entire legacy if you feel a need to change servers.

b) a sliding cost that becomes prohibitive to some based on how much disposable income they have and how many characters they have, or a system that allows transfers but forces divided legacies if the person transferring doesn't have the disposable income to cover the cost of all of their characters?

 

second question, which is actually a different topic. what would be the downside for bioware if they used this as an opportunity to combine legacies for people who rolled on different servers? what if they didn't use it as an opportunity to release another cartel market update, but instead just helped their subscribers for free this one time? why is this such a horrible thing that a few of you feel the need to throw insults and tantrums?

 

i believe the third issue the community team is no longer addressing is allowing EU <--> NA transfers, which as i understand it pretty much everyone agrees should be allowed.

Edited June 14, 2013 by curtkram

[Ratajack]

calling people entitled is just a crutch for someone who doesn't have anything useful to add. i'm not asking bioware to foot the bill for anything. i'm paying them for a service. i'm paying them now, i was paying them when their servers were dieing. you know that already. you know that pretending i'm trying to get something for free is BS.

 

i'm pretty sure every single comment you've made on this topic reinforces your goal of paying bioware more. you've repeated many times that you think you should have to pay bioware more than your subscription to transfer characters. you've repeated many times that you think people with more characters should pay more. apparently you think you would be somehow less of a person, an "entitled" person, if you were to receive this service in a manner that did not cost more based on how many characters you have.

 

i never played WoW. i have never, in my life, paid to transfer a character in any video game. there is no way i would have assumed that's normal, considering my influence of SWTOR came from SWTOR and not WoW. the following is what the community team said in december of 2011, which indicates there were plans on making server transfers available, and they did not, at that time, indication they would be paid. while you were pretending you were in WoW with lightsabers, i was reading the swtor forums.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showpost.php?p=570994&postcount=1

 

i want bioware to give everyone a reasonable option to keep their legacies together, whether they transfer or not, and whether transfers cost money or not. a sliding scale of fees that makes people pay more makes that goal less achievable. also, i think bioware should treat their players with some respect. saying it's my fault for the servers dieing and i should take responsibility for that doesn't help. saying i should be responsible for this game ending up different than WoW doesn't help. the difference between you and me is that i want equal access to the game services for all subscribers, including "legacy" and achievements as part of the game service, and you want to exclude people on a sliding scale dependent on the wealth they're able to give bioware. you're trying to essentially add another tier above subscriber, for patron access or whatever, so you can get access to basic game features other subscribers are denied.

 

If I recall correctly, you are already on record as saying that BW should put your legacy together for free. Ah, yes, here's the quote:

 

'force transferred twice' sounds like something that was done at the sole discretion of bioware without giving you any options, except to quit. i would think it would be legitimate to blame them for changing the decision you made without asking you and without your authorization. if you want to take responsibility for events you were given no control over or responsibility for (specifically talking about the forced transfers there), that's fine. i don't want bioware to make decisions like that which encourage people to quit. they've obviously done that a lot so far. i'm posting here so maybe they will rethink that strategy and make decisions that will encourage players to stay. if people want to keep playing, i sincerely believe that will lead to a better game and a more enjoyable experience for me and all of the other people that want to enjoy this game.

 

i understand the server hopping. i'm not at all opposed to limits. i'm not even opposed to charges. just to start things off, fixing my split up legacy isn't going to hurt server balance, it isn't going to cost them anything, it might actually help them them build a bit of brand loyalty. ea could really use some of that. then, let the people who got stuck on EU <--> NA servers get to where they want in addition to the pvpers. they could give subscribers a bit of time to get where they want to be, then start charging. but whatever they do, don't charge for each character, because in this game that's pointless. i'm asking them to introduce a system that their players will like, instead of a system that will make players have to decide the lesser of two evils. the legacy system was built to play multiple characters on the same server. it's not account wide. if those legacies do get broken up, it breaks the system bioware created. it just wouldn't be smart to create a transfer system that breaks the legacy system. they already built the legacy system that won't work as intended with single character transfers.

 

when you said 'no' to your children, it's not because you didn't have the money. it's because you're their parent, and you're responsible for them, and you wanted to teach them limits. to say i'm a child is condescending and dumb. bioware isn't my mother. neither are you. they don't have that authority, and they don't have that responsibility. besides, i'm not asking for a pony. i'm pointing out your ideal of charging people more for what will ultimately be an inadequate service is unwise. go ahead and charge $18, just don't charge people to screw up the legacy system. (and fix my legacy for free. i'm not asking for a pony, i'm asking for an apology, because i think bioware made a lot of bad decisions. i think a million + people leaving support that theory. i think firing most of their staff supports that theory.)

 

when bioware introduced legacy, i was not allowed to have the time i spent leveling characters contribute. when i leveld one toon, it wouldn't contribute to the legacy of the other toon. that is not how the system was designed to work. 'legacy' is a reward system. you work toward a goal and they give you a reward. that is a positive stimulus, which was taken from me. in operative conditioning, i'm pretty sure the word for removing a positive stimulus is negative punishment. i'm sure there is a gray area in there and you can disagree with me until the end of time if you want. maybe it wasn't a stimulus i was given that was taken away, but the potential for a stimulus that was taken away. whatever. either way, to assume those actions, created entirely by bioware, would make me feel good about being a subscriber, is ridiculous. i find it hard to believe that when your legacy was split and you lost characters, it made you feel better about the game.

 

That's you asking BW to foot the bill for your actions, BTW. That would be the you that feels entitled to have someone else clean up your mistakes.

 

You want to claim that I am advocating paying a higher cost to BW. I'm not. There is a difference between advocating higher costs, and saying that a company has priced an entirely OPTIONAL service competitively compared to the MMO genre in general. There is a difference between advocating higher costs and advocating not catering to the self-entitled masses.

[Ratajack]

I sorry.. my clairvoyance was not as clear as yours.

 

In every game I played the opposing factions activities NEVER effects the other side. So MY clairvoyance quickly decided that 2 legacies were the way to go. One for Repubs and one for the slimeballs(aka sithy wonders). So I continued with my dual legacies until... I realized a tad late the the Slimeballs' legacy stuff would help the Repubs.

 

SHOCK, AWE, what human thought of this??????

 

and then the forced mergers came and it went all to hell....

 

So now whose fault is the mess of toons on different servers? Guess I "guessed" wrong and should be punished for it.

 

But, you are ENTITLED to your opinion, as a special SNOWFLAKE of the white knight variety, to make FIRST WORLD fun of my predicament.

 

If I recall correctly, BW did make it known that while the full extent of the legacy system was not in place, that it would affect all characters on a single server, Imperial and Republic.

[Ratajack]

first question, what would be best for players of the game, and why?

 

a) a modest charge to move your entire legacy if you feel a need to change servers.

b) a sliding cost that becomes prohibitive to some based on how much disposable income they have and how many characters they have, or a system that allows transfers but forces divided legacies if the person transferring doesn't have the disposable income to cover the cost of all of their characters?

 

second question, which is actually a different topic. what would be the downside for bioware if they used this as an opportunity to combine legacies for people who rolled on different servers? what if they didn't use it as an opportunity to release another cartel market update, but instead just helped their subscribers for free this one time? why is this such a horrible thing that a few of you feel the need to throw insults and tantrums?

 

I refer you to the children's book IF YOU GIVE A MOUSE A COOKIE...

 

i believe the third issue the community team is no longer addressing is allowing EU <--> NA transfers, which as i understand it pretty much everyone agrees should be allowed.

 

I agree that allowing EU<-->NA transfers would be good.

[curtkram]

there are 3 different issues, as i see it. to say the first issue is the same as the second is disingenuous.

 

first question, what would be best for players of the game, and why?

 

a) a modest charge to move your entire legacy if you feel a need to change servers.

b) a sliding cost that becomes prohibitive to some based on how much disposable income they have and how many characters they have, or a system that allows transfers but forces divided legacies if the person transferring doesn't have the disposable income to cover the cost of all of their characters?

 

second question, which is actually a different topic. what would be the downside for bioware if they used this as an opportunity to combine legacies for people who rolled on different servers? what if they didn't use it as an opportunity to release another cartel market update, but instead just helped their subscribers for free this one time? why is this such a horrible thing that a few of you feel the need to throw insults and tantrums?

 

i believe the third issue the community team is no longer addressing is allowing EU <--> NA transfers, which as i understand it pretty much everyone agrees should be allowed.

 

ratajack, i do claim you're advocating paying bioware higher costs. your stance in every post has been to charge players as much as possible and implement it in such a way that either a) pushes transfers out of reach for people with limited income and multiple characters or b) forces their legacy to be split across multiple servers. i don't see any way to interpret your statements that would suggest anything other that you advocating paying bioware more money. when i ask you why you think that, you either compare swtor to wow or you claim i have entitlement issues. that word, by the way, doesn't have any meaning anymore. it's been overused by people that don't understand what it used to mean. then you change the topic to something unrelated like responsibility or legacy bars.

[chuixupu]

You're being a little too general man. The issues that would make you want to leave may be entirely different from someone else's. other people's motives is something I can generalize. And saying "Nobody's gonna quit because of server transfer prices!" Is a generalization. And an incorrect one at that. I believe it's already happening.

 

I didn't say nobody would. People leave over all kinds of things. What I said was, there would be no "mass exodus" over this issue specifically. There have been much, much bigger outcries over decisions that have been made for the game. The biggest outcry I have seen regarding transfers was that it was postponed again. Nobody is being forced to make a server transfer (other than the APAC people). I'm already used to playing games where we've had half the people we know transfer all their servers off to another server and back multiple times ($25 each). Most people just didn't do it all at once.

[Alandross]

i never played WoW. i have never, in my life, paid to transfer a character in any video game. there is no way i would have assumed that's normal, considering my influence of SWTOR came from SWTOR and not WoW. the following is what the community team said in december of 2011, which indicates there were plans on making server transfers available, and they did not, at that time, indication they would be paid. while you were pretending you were in WoW with lightsabers, i was reading the swtor forums.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showpost.php?p=570994&postcount=1

 

The mass majority of MMOs have charged for character transfers. If you go back to when it was a very manual process in games like EQ in the past it would cost anywhere from 25-50 per character.

 

So just because you aren't familiar with the genre and the standard of it does not in fact mean there isn't one. Not that you are at fault for not knowing this. In hindsight Bioware could have messaged that more clearly and in hindsight you can adjust your expectations based off of what you might have learned about other MMOs since then.

[Alandross]

there are 3 different issues, as i see it. to say the first issue is the same as the second is disingenuous.

 

first question, what would be best for players of the game, and why?

 

a) a modest charge to move your entire legacy if you feel a need to change servers.

b) a sliding cost that becomes prohibitive to some based on how much disposable income they have and how many characters they have, or a system that allows transfers but forces divided legacies if the person transferring doesn't have the disposable income to cover the cost of all of their characters?

 

second question, which is actually a different topic. what would be the downside for bioware if they used this as an opportunity to combine legacies for people who rolled on different servers? what if they didn't use it as an opportunity to release another cartel market update, but instead just helped their subscribers for free this one time? why is this such a horrible thing that a few of you feel the need to throw insults and tantrums?

 

i believe the third issue the community team is no longer addressing is allowing EU <--> NA transfers, which as i understand it pretty much everyone agrees should be allowed.

 

ratajack, i do claim you're advocating paying bioware higher costs. your stance in every post has been to charge players as much as possible and implement it in such a way that either a) pushes transfers out of reach for people with limited income and multiple characters or b) forces their legacy to be split across multiple servers. i don't see any way to interpret your statements that would suggest anything other that you advocating paying bioware more money. when i ask you why you think that, you either compare swtor to wow or you claim i have entitlement issues. that word, by the way, doesn't have any meaning anymore. it's been overused by people that don't understand what it used to mean. then you change the topic to something unrelated like responsibility or legacy bars.

 

Look, Ratajack and others (including me) are simply arguing common sense. It's pretty simple actually:

 

1) MMO Devs want to add server transfer

2) They add it the simplest way first to get it working... per character

3) They then consider additions to that feature

 

This is how product development works.

[Jumajin]

The mass majority of MMOs have charged for character transfers. If you go back to when it was a very manual process in games like EQ in the past it would cost anywhere from 25-50 per character.

 

So just because you aren't familiar with the genre and the standard of it does not in fact mean there isn't one. Not that you are at fault for not knowing this. In hindsight Bioware could have messaged that more clearly and in hindsight you can adjust your expectations based off of what you might have learned about other MMOs since then.

 

This is why nowadays I just prefer to play games with a single server, such as STO or DCUO. My characters have been bounced around here already because EA/Bioware felt the need to launch with so many servers. Same mistake Rift made when they overestimated the staying power of their game's pre-order population.

[DarthDano]

I will freely admit that the full extent of the legacy system was not known until 1.2. Will you admit that you knew the effort you were putting into your different characters was going toward building two SEPARATE legacies and that you could have chosen to put all your effort into a single legacy AT ANY TIME, but chose not to do so?

 

I will concede to the fact I knew effort was being wasted after the full extent of the legacy system was unveiled. And for all intensive purposes I did unwillingly abandon 2 toons on the shadowlands. But very soon I will return for my fallen comrades, and they shall join the others on Jedi Covenant.

[Alandross]

This is why nowadays I just prefer to play games with a single server, such as STO or DCUO. My characters have been bounced around here already because EA/Bioware felt the need to launch with so many servers. Same mistake Rift made when they overestimated the staying power of their game's pre-order population.

 

Agreed, I do the same. It's a living hazard in the MMO game space, it's a known quantity that you learn pretty quick.

 

I do have to give Rift credit for giving weekly free character transfers that work very easily and fast though.

[chuixupu]

I can see them adding a full legacy transfer feature in the future, as well as guild transfer. One step at a time. Taking them long enough just to get the basic thing out. I think it is unwise to rush to transfer all characters at once, even if the cost is not a problem to you. I'm always surprised by what people's impressions are of other servers when they haven't spent a lot of time on them.

[DkSharktooth]

Subs don't matter anymore, they will come and go based on how good or bad the next patch is. Cartel Market will stay forever. Edited June 14, 2013 by DkSharktooth

[chuixupu]

Subs don't matter anymore, they will come and go based on how good or bad the next patch is. Cartel Market will stay forever.

 

Subs make up the majority of people buying from the CM. People who play for free are cheap and don't spend that much on the CM.

[CosmicKat]

Subs make up the majority of people buying from the CM. People who play for free are cheap and don't spend that much on the CM.

 

Yep.

 

A small minority of subs are spending huge amounts of money over and above their subs. This is their target market now, the income from the subs is just gravy.

[Ratajack]

there are 3 different issues, as i see it. to say the first issue is the same as the second is disingenuous.

 

first question, what would be best for players of the game, and why?

 

a) a modest charge to move your entire legacy if you feel a need to change servers.

b) a sliding cost that becomes prohibitive to some based on how much disposable income they have and how many characters they have, or a system that allows transfers but forces divided legacies if the person transferring doesn't have the disposable income to cover the cost of all of their characters?

 

second question, which is actually a different topic. what would be the downside for bioware if they used this as an opportunity to combine legacies for people who rolled on different servers? what if they didn't use it as an opportunity to release another cartel market update, but instead just helped their subscribers for free this one time? why is this such a horrible thing that a few of you feel the need to throw insults and tantrums?

 

i believe the third issue the community team is no longer addressing is allowing EU <--> NA transfers, which as i understand it pretty much everyone agrees should be allowed.

 

ratajack, i do claim you're advocating paying bioware higher costs. your stance in every post has been to charge players as much as possible and implement it in such a way that either a) pushes transfers out of reach for people with limited income and multiple characters or b) forces their legacy to be split across multiple servers. i don't see any way to interpret your statements that would suggest anything other that you advocating paying bioware more money. when i ask you why you think that, you either compare swtor to wow or you claim i have entitlement issues. that word, by the way, doesn't have any meaning anymore. it's been overused by people that don't understand what it used to mean. then you change the topic to something unrelated like responsibility or legacy bars.

 

Have I said that BW should charge everyone $25 per character like WOW? No.

 

What I have said is that BW is providing an entirely OPTIONAL service that has been highly desired and requested, although they are not doing it the way you want them to do it. They are providing this service at a reasonable and competitive rate relative to the MMO genre in general. Is this rate higher than the "FREE" you want? YES.

 

Being willing to pay a reasonable cost set by a company for an entirely OPTIONAL service does not mean that I am advocating charging as much as possible. The fact that I do not suffer from the same false sense of entitlement that some do, does not mean that I want to pay more.

 

I know that word entitled just rankles you. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

[Avicii]

OP mentions the devs as if they are the ones who have total control over the pricing of such things. Remember the developers are the ones with the original vision for the game and would probably love nothing more than to let players more easily transfer characters. EA is the culprit when it comes to money.

 

Also, the fact that transferring in this game is cheaper than in other games is a very valid point. There will always be someone who feels they can't afford something at a given price. When something is already set below the "market value," affordability complaints are going to fall on deaf ears.

 

Both if these are good points, the first one in particular. I work in Dev for accounting software, I create it, fix the DBs, test it. I have no input on cost of yearly maintenance or product cost, this is all decided by people way up the food chain and no not the support staff lol. A lot of people have trouble recognizing the separation in companies that exist. A customer might tell me yearly maintenance or the 225 an hour they pay for me to fix **** us too much but I have nothing I can do about it as I don't set the costs.

 

Just a little perspective

[DarthDano]

I know that word entitled just rankles you. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

 

LOL!! That's why you use that word so much isn't it? because you know how demeaning it is. It's like the economic "N" word.

[Ratajack]

LOL!! That's why you use that word so much isn't it? because you know how demeaning it is. It's like the economic "N" word.

 

I use that word because it is ACCURATE.

[DarthDano]

Both if these are good points, the first one in particular. I work in Dev for accounting software, I create it, fix the DBs, test it. I have no input on cost of yearly maintenance or product cost, this is all decided by people way up the food chain and no not the support staff lol. A lot of people have trouble recognizing the separation in companies that exist. A customer might tell me yearly maintenance or the 225 an hour they pay for me to fix **** us too much but I have nothing I can do about it as I don't set the costs.

 

Just a little perspective

 

Info assimilated, thank you. I'll be sure not to throw the devs out there again. I'll use Execs from now on. Sorry Devs!

[DarthDano]

I use that word because it is ACCURATE.

 

In some cases for some people it is accurate. But not everyone who disagrees with the transfer price has to be "ENTITLED" but that seems to be your M.O.

[HoboWithAStick]

While I think its cool its cheaper then allot of other games what I think you have to remember is ALLOT of games get this service for free. You also have to remember games like wow where you do pay 25 bucks to transfer you get allot of value out of your 15 buck a month sub. This game you get very poor value out of your sub dollar. Not to mention in the game allot of people only want to move toons because of the whole population issues before they server merges. If you wanted to play with other people you were forced to go play on another server and at this point your toons might not be all together anymore.

[Alandross]

I use that word because it is ACCURATE.

 

There's nothing wrong with being "entitled" to something. People have turned that into a curse word, as if it inherently is bad. It's simply a word that has a meaning and in this case it seems to be used. You feel entitled to legacy server transfers, or so it would seem.

[Ratajack]

In some cases for some people it is accurate. But not everyone who disagrees with the transfer price has to be "ENTITLED" but that seems to be your M.O.

 

Not everyone is asking for BW to fix their legacy fro free, either.

 

While I might use that word to reference ta few select individuals, I do tend to use it in a generic sense as well, at times. I apologize for any confusion.

[Alandross]

While I think its cool its cheaper then allot of other games what I think you have to remember is ALLOT of games get this service for free. You also have to remember games like wow where you do pay 25 bucks to transfer you get allot of value out of your 15 buck a month sub. This game you get very poor value out of your sub dollar. Not to mention in the game allot of people only want to move toons because of the whole population issues before they server merges. If you wanted to play with other people you were forced to go play on another server and at this point your toons might not be all together anymore.

 

Wanting server transfers to be free and thinking that their current first pass of server transfer costs isn't unreasonable aren't mutually exclusive. Some games charge less, some games charge more. Hence the drama that this is crazily priced is a bit ridiculous, though it's perfectly fair to constructively request something of more value.