Petition to make the ewok not buy able by cc

[Ratajack]

Considering HK was available on the CM, I don't see any valid reason to not put Treek there as well.

I'd be happy with multiple paths to obtain new companions though.

 

There is one HUGE difference between HK-51 and Treek. You cannot purchase HK-51 with CC's until you meet the requirement to unlock him, namely completing the quest chain on at least one character. You CANNOT bypass this requirement by throwing money at BW via CC's. With Treek, you can totally BYPASS the legacy 40 requirement by throwing money at BW via CC's.

 

If there were no requirement to unlock this companion without using CC's, it would be different. If legacy 40 gave the companion for FREE to all characters in that legacy, and those without legacy 40 could purchase Treek via CC's or a million credits, it would be a different story. As it stands, you have two choices to acquire this new companion, legacy 40 AND a million credits or throw money at BW and pay CC's.

[Dawginole]

Dead on. This is specifically designed to psychologically encourage a player to spend money beyond their sub fee rather than to pay their hard earned in game credits. Because from behind a computer screen the 1mil credits will have taken more "effort" than the equivalent real money in CC.

[LG_XxLegacyxX]

I will have to respectfully disagree. I am a casual player (like a vast majority in the game) who has little time to "grind" for an "optional" companion. I fully endorse the use of the CM and have personally purchased almost $250 in Cartel Coins in the last 30 days for all of my new characters to unlock gear and legacy perks. I think Treek should be purchasable a multitude of ways INCLUDING Cartel Coins. Thanks

 

Although I'm not one to spend $250, I agree. I'm only legacy level 35....and let me tell you, it took a while to get there. I'm not going to make legacy level 40 anytime soon, and I'd rather have Treek sooner than later.

[ScruffyWhite]

Signed. One reward that takes *********** time to get and bioware get their pants wet at the opportunity of more money zzz

[Greenify]

Nevermind, you guys can keep your cc method 2100cc, good solid price there BW.

[Dawginole]

Should have been $30. I'd like to just rake the players that don't want to put any effort into questing over the coals.

[branmakmuffin]

Should have been $30. I'd like to just rake the players that don't want to put any effort into questing over the coals.

Since questing takes no effort in any event, that presumably includes raking yourself over the coals.

 

Such petty, mean-spiritedness.

[Dawginole]

Since questing takes no effort in any event, that presumably includes raking yourself over the coals.

 

Such petty, mean-spiritedness.

 

So clicking a button in a store is the same as running a quest? LOL no. If designed correctly a quest for this type of thing should require effort, a time investment, and team work. Of someone doesn't want to participate in that and skip that requirement then the trade off should be very high.

[Cyberwoman]

Should have been $30. I'd like to just rake the players that don't want to put any effort into questing over the coals.

 

There is no need to be so mean-spirited and rude about this. Some people can unlock it via Legacy and CM, so what? If you want to unlock it via Legacy then go ahead, you can be proud of that. What other people choose to do however, is of no concern to you. The only way this could possible effect you is the fact that you wont be able to show Treek off like a trophy now, and if effort is the most important factor here, then why do you need to do that in the first place?

 

Also, I have sixteen characters, several at level 50+, and have done almost every mission I can find in this game and yet I am still only Legacy level 31. Those of us who do unlock her via CM are not as lazy as you seem to think!

 

So clicking a button in a store is the same as running a quest? LOL no. If designed correctly a quest for this type of thing should require effort, a time investment, and team work. Of someone doesn't want to participate in that and skip that requirement then the trade off should be very high.

 

If Treek was available via a quest I would agree with what you mean, if not your tone and way of expressing it, but a long story-based quest (Which should be solo I think) is not what the alternative to buying Treek of the CM is. Legacy is a very different (especially given its ridiculously high level), and less worthwhile aspect of the game I think, which is why I am glad we have a choice here!

Edited August 1, 2013 by Cyberwoman

[Dawginole]

Reading comprehension FTW. Neither the CC or credits purchase Treek. They purchase an item that starts a quest from which you obtain her the first time. From there you can open her on other toons via CC or credits. The quest has a nice barrier for entry though I think it should have been even higher because I like a challenge. If you like to play Star Wars FarmVille that's cool. That's not the game I want to play and am free to express my opinion on that. I'm growing really tired of comments like yours that are so emotional. It's just a different way of QQ'ing because someone doesn't have some mythical time allotment to play the game. When in reality that's just an excuse because someone wants something they can't have right away. Sometimes things in games take time to earn and should and the result is a richer feeling of fulfillment. But in this case it works out fine. If someone is so lazy that they can't run four daily areas two days in a row for 1mil credits (doing so only takes about 2.5hrs btw) then they can pay $21 (LOL) to open a quest. What's hysterical is that the majority of people that play this game probably don't even have jobs where they make over $21/hr. So those folks in that camp that go buy this thing have justified that a digital pet is worth the equivalent to 3hrs real world work at minimum wage but wouldn't be willing to put 3hrs in game time to get it for free. Darwin Award at its finest.

 

And if you aren't 50 legacy with all that then you broke your game. I'm 3/4 into level 49 with only two 55's, two 50's and a 38.

Edited August 1, 2013 by Dawginole

[branmakmuffin]

So clicking a button in a store is the same as running a quest? LOL no.

LOL yes.

 

If designed correctly a quest for this type of thing should require effort

You mean like going into the yard and digging a hole then filling it up again? That takes effort. If it takes you effort to play this game, you're doing it wrong.

 

a time investment, and team work. Of someone doesn't want to participate in that and skip that requirement then the trade off should be very high.

Because ...?

[Cyberwoman]

Reading comprehension FTW. Neither the CC or credits purchase Treek. They purchase an item that starts a quest from which you obtain her the first time. From there you can open her on other toons via CC or credits.

 

Yes, I understand that. I fail to see the point you are making.

 

The quest has a nice barrier for entry though I think it should have been even higher because I like a challenge.

 

Good for you, but I would remind you that you are not the only person who plays this game, so BW do have to think of others when planing out there content.

 

If you like to play Star Wars FarmVille that's cool.

 

I detest FarmVille, an utterly boring game in my opinion.

 

That's not the game I want to play and am free to express my opinion on that.

 

Of course you are, and I apologize if I gave the impression that I was smothering your freedom of speech. I think it is great that we can come to this forum and give our opinions on the game (constructively and polity) no fan will have the same opinion on any subject and I love that fact!

I'm growing really tired of comments like yours that are so emotional.

 

Was I being emotional? I was simply stating my opinion (Although I do play Sith more then Jedi, so perhaps I am not that great at controlling my emotions! )

 

It's just a different way of QQ'ing because someone doesn't have some mythical time allotment to play the game. When in reality that's just an excuse because someone wants something they can't have right away.

 

I dont think that really is the case. Getting to Legacy level 40 dose take a long time, and thanks to that pesky little thing called reality, not everyone has the time to get anywhere near that level. I would be more inclined to agree with you if the Legacy requirement was around 20-25, but it isn't.

 

Also, less we forget, Treek is a completely optional part of the game. It's not like she is a piece of end-game gear or something.

 

Sometimes things in games take time to earn and should and the result is a richer feeling of fulfillment.

 

I agree, but I dont see how getting a companion via Legacy is much of a fulfilling endeavor. Your not actually completing a long quest to get her (Which I would have much liked) or grinding reputation in order to accesses her. Legacy is simply an indication of how much time you have put in to the game in my opinion. Many people will just long in and have accesses to her almost straight away. How is that earning her?

 

Don't get me wrong, I do think that the Legacy system needs more non-CC rewards, I just really dont see why Treek a companion has to be one, specifically a companion who seems designed to help with the leveling progress.

 

But in this case it works out fine. If someone is so lazy that they can't run four daily areas two days in a row for 1mil credits (doing so only takes about 2.5hrs btw) then they can pay $21 (LOL) to open a quest. What's hysterical is that the majority of people that play this game probably don't even have jobs where they make over $21/hr. So those folks in that camp that go buy this thing have justified that a digital pet is with the equivalent to 3hrs real world work at minimum wage but wouldn't be willing to put 3hrs in game time to get it for free. Darwin Award at its finest.

 

To be honest it isn't that hard to get 1 million credits I agree, but few people will be unlocking her because they can't be bothered to farm the credits, they will be unlocking her because they have yet to get to Legacy level 40. If I did have Legacy level 40, then I would be buying her in-game rather then via the CM. As it is I don't, so I will be getting her via the CM and even if I did have Legacy level 40, I would still be supporting the idea of making her available on the CC as well.

 

Even if they did, so what? You don't know there financial situation, and you shouldn't really judge them just because they take a different path to you.

 

And if you aren't 50 legacy with all that then you broke your game. I'm 3/4 into level 49 with only two 55's, two 50's and a 38.

 

Just checked and I have a level 55, 53, 50, 43, 39, 38, 31, 21, 14, 12, 11, 3, 6, 4, 2 character and a Legacy level of 31 and a 1/2. Do you play much endgame? I mostly level alts and only dabble occasionally in Endgame content, which is perhaps why others have a higher Legacy then me (I think if so the Legacy system is a bit biased . . .)

Edited August 1, 2013 by Cyberwoman

[Dawginole]

LOL yes.

 

 

You mean like going into the yard and digging a hole then filling it up again? That takes effort. If it takes you effort to play this game, you're doing it wrong.

 

 

Because ...?

 

Wow you're thick headed. I didn't say the game took effort. In fact that's my point. It needs to be more challenging. Some people would rather work toward something and find that more fun than paying $15 to log in to press a button and win a prize.

[Cyberwoman]

Wow you're thick headed. I didn't say the game took effort. In fact that's my point. It needs to be more challenging. Some people would rather work toward something and find that more fun than paying $15 to log in to press a button and win a prize.

 

And some people would rather buy an optional Ewok companion using CC. So what? I'm sorry that you find the game to easy, but as I said before, you're not the only one who plays the game!

Edited August 1, 2013 by Cyberwoman

[Dawginole]

And some people would rather buy an optional Ewok companion using CC. So what? I'm sorry that you find the game to easy, but as I said before, your not the only one who plays the game!

 

You're*

[Cyberwoman]

You're*

 

Oh, thanks. Dyslexia strikes again!

[AshlaBoga]

Should have been $30. I'd like to just rake the players that don't want to put any effort into questing over the coals.

 

Well if they buy the bulk CC the 2100 comes to what, $19? So I'd feel a bit more smug if they raised it to $25.

All in all, I just hope that they don't offer discounts on Treek until Dec 2013 at the very very very very earliest.

[LordArtemis]

Wow you're thick headed. I didn't say the game took effort. In fact that's my point. It needs to be more challenging. Some people would rather work toward something and find that more fun than paying $15 to log in to press a button and win a prize.

 

This is a toxic viewpoint IMO. Yes, I also lament the loss of challenge (note I do not use the word "effort" since the amount of effort required has NEVER been substantial to play an MMO) in modern MMOs...I remember the days of permadeath and player looting...that's how old I am.

 

But the market no longer supports traditional or hardcore MMO play like it once did. And the problem is, for better or worse, casual players dominate the market and have different priorities.

 

QoL (or convenience depending on your viewpoint), solo play and appearance are some of the top casual demands in the market.

 

Therefore, the more challenging an MMO is, the less appeal it has to the casual dominated market IMO.

[LG_XxLegacyxX]

Reading comprehension FTW. Neither the CC or credits purchase Treek. They purchase an item that starts a quest from which you obtain her the first time. From there you can open her on other toons via CC or credits. The quest has a nice barrier for entry though I think it should have been even higher because I like a challenge. If you like to play Star Wars FarmVille that's cool. That's not the game I want to play and am free to express my opinion on that. I'm growing really tired of comments like yours that are so emotional. It's just a different way of QQ'ing because someone doesn't have some mythical time allotment to play the game. When in reality that's just an excuse because someone wants something they can't have right away. Sometimes things in games take time to earn and should and the result is a richer feeling of fulfillment. But in this case it works out fine. If someone is so lazy that they can't run four daily areas two days in a row for 1mil credits (doing so only takes about 2.5hrs btw) then they can pay $21 (LOL) to open a quest. What's hysterical is that the majority of people that play this game probably don't even have jobs where they make over $21/hr. So those folks in that camp that go buy this thing have justified that a digital pet is worth the equivalent to 3hrs real world work at minimum wage but wouldn't be willing to put 3hrs in game time to get it for free. Darwin Award at its finest.

 

And if you aren't 50 legacy with all that then you broke your game. I'm 3/4 into level 49 with only two 55's, two 50's and a 38.

 

I don't think you're getting the point here man I don't want to grind legacy level to hit level 40. I can make one million in one day with my 55, 51, and 50 easily. It's not the credits, it's the insanely high legacy level you have to be, and the time it takes to get to legacy level 50.

 

IT TAKES F***ING FOREVER!

[CosmicKat]

This is a toxic viewpoint IMO. Yes, I also lament the loss of challenge (note I do not use the word "effort" since the amount of effort required has NEVER been substantial to play an MMO) in modern MMOs...I remember the days of permadeath and player looting...that's how old I am.

 

But the market no longer supports traditional or hardcore MMO play like it once did. And the problem is, for better or worse, casual players dominate the market and have different priorities.

 

QoL (or convenience depending on your viewpoint), solo play and appearance are some of the top casual demands in the market.

 

Therefore, the more challenging an MMO is, the less appeal it has to the casual dominated market IMO.

 

Just doing my duty to offer counterpoints...

 

- There hasn't been any traditional or hardcore MMO's made in a very long time. When a product is not available, its current sales can't be used as a measure of how popular (or unpopular) that product is. The popularity of surviving hardcore MMO's can't be used as a barometer of popularity due to the fact that PC games of any type do not age well.

 

- The majority of solo and/or casual friendly MMO's released have failed. Most of those, spectacularly so.

 

- Excluding WoW, the total number of people playing MMO's has only marginally increased since the days of hardcore MMO's. The numbers have not kept pace with the proliferation of "gaming PC's". Percentage wise, there are probably less gamers in MMO's today than 10 years ago.

 

- Hardcore MMO's historically hold subscribers far longer than casual ones do. One subscriber paying for 2 years is equal to 12 people subscribing for 2 months. To match income levels, a casual game needs far more turnover of players than does a hardcore one.

 

- Current player numbers are highly colored by the fact that many (a majority?) of the players are not paying anything to play. These people should not be counted towards popularity because they simply are not actual customers. F2P players will also usually have multiple F2P accounts as this is an easy way to counter some F2P limitations.

 

- QoL and appearance have always been core elements of all MMO's, and are probably more important to hardcore players than to casuals. These options were more limited in hardcore games simply because 10-15 years ago the technical limitations of hardware would not allow it.

Edited August 3, 2013 by CosmicKat

[Desolaytore]

Wow you're thick headed. I didn't say the game took effort. In fact that's my point. It needs to be more challenging. Some people would rather work toward something and find that more fun than paying $15 to log in to press a button and win a prize.

 

A good reason why I got tired of WoW, it stopped being challenging.

Rather work/grind and earn **** the old fun way than toss CC at everything, how ****in boring. /sigh

[TravelersWay]

A good reason why I got tired of WoW, it stopped being challenging.

Rather work/grind and earn **** the old fun way than toss CC at everything, how ****in boring. /sigh

 

Welcome to the new age.

 

Just doing my duty to offer counterpoints...

 

- There hasn't been any traditional or hardcore MMO's made in a very long time. When a product is not available, its current sales can't be used as a measure of how popular (or unpopular) that product is. The popularity of surviving hardcore MMO's can't be used as a barometer of popularity due to the fact that PC games of any type do not age well.

And why haven't they been made? Why are they not available except in a very limited sense, or holdovers from the "good ole days"? It's because of the changing trends in society, and in a smaller microcosm the changing trends in the gaming community. Certainly, an argument can be made that a business will discontinue a product to introduce and push something new, but the trend in the entertainment industry has always been to milk a product for all it is worth. If pure sandbox and "old school" MMOs were truly that profitable and were trending to be so in the future, they wouldn't have gone away.

 

- The majority of solo and/or casual friendly MMO's released have failed. Most of those, spectacularly so.

Failed how, exactly? If you mean match WoW subscribers numbers, then yes. But WoW was a perfect storm that arrived at the perfect moment. Quite the contrary, however, your first point above proves that the solo/casual friendly MMO model has succeeded quite well, and ESO appears to be the latest installment of such.

 

- Excluding WoW, the total number of people playing MMO's has only marginally increased since the days of hardcore MMO's. The numbers have not kept pace with the proliferation of "gaming PC's". Percentage wise, there are probably less gamers in MMO's today than 10 years ago.

Where exactly did you get these "facts" from? Anyone can make numbers fit their argument by including or excluding things arbitrarily. However, if you truly want to compare the number of MMO players back in the "good ole days" compared to today, by all rights you need to include all MMOs in your population count. But go ahead, exclude WoW for no other reason than it blows your point out of the water - the Eastern MMO market says hello and blows your point out of the water anyway. There are Eastern MMOs that top out WoWs numbers from what I understand. No matter how you look at it (as long as you actually look at it objectively), the number of MMO players has substantially increased from the time the genre was born back in the 90's. It's because of this that we have so many MMOs to choose from in today's age.

 

- Hardcore MMO's historically hold subscribers far longer than casual ones do. One subscriber paying for 2 years is equal to 12 people subscribing for 2 months. To match income levels, a casual game needs far more turnover of players than does a hardcore one.

Again, do you have any unbiased statical analysis to back up this point? In my anecdotal and unstatistical experience, sandbox MMOs have tended to hold subs for longer than thempark MMOs. That is distinctly different than Hardcore/Casual, even though some see sandbox as hardcore. Again, if you don't ignore WoW, and you consider GW1 (even though it didn't use a sub based model), both games are casual and themepark based and have kept up their dedicated user base quite well for the better part of a decade. The same can be said of Eve - the premier sandbox example in the genre. Now, with the rise of F2P, we can make the argument that the sub based model is declining, but that is not solely due to hardcore vs. casual and subscriber retention - that is indeed a part of it, but there are also many other factors involved, not the least of which is the fact that the industry has finally learned that a cash shop based model is infinitely more profitable than a strict sub-based model.

 

- Current player numbers are highly colored by the fact that many (a majority?) of the players are not paying anything to play. These people should not be counted towards popularity because they simply are not actual customers. F2P players will also usually have multiple F2P accounts as this is an easy way to counter some F2P limitations.

Again, dismissing things arbitrarily to try to back up your argument. As a matter of fact, your very point here is one of the reason's many people do not like SWTOR's F2P implementation - it's the EA way of looking at their customer base. A good F2P implementation does not look at the freebies as non-customers, but as players of their games who have the potential to be customers and at the very least as a source of advertising if said freebies enjoy playing their game and continue to "recruit" friends and family to play. The point of fact remains that a pure F2P game does not need very many players to be "paying customers" - they only need the critical mass of whales to maintain profitability and that tends to be anywhere from 1%-5% of the total player base.

 

- QoL and appearance have always been core elements of all MMO's, and are probably more important to hardcore players than to casuals. These options were more limited in hardcore games simply because 10-15 years ago the technical limitations of hardware would not allow it.

 

And hence why we see more QoL things like speed boosts and such in cash shops nowadays, then, isn't it. And thusly, if that is the case, then there should be no problem in having a companion like Treek available as a QoL cash shop purchase.

Edited August 3, 2013 by TravelersWay

[Akow]

Who cares if you been paying for this game since day one , congrats here is a free COOKIE for you

Now everyone needs to grow and remember you choose to play a game with a f2p option . Its either pay monthly or micro pay for the things you want IE the new Ewok

[branmakmuffin]

Wow you're thick headed. I didn't say the game took effort. In fact that's my point. It needs to be more challenging.

Then go play EVE or something. "Problem" solved.

[LordArtemis]

Study on MMO loyalty and who plays MMOs

 

Not super new study, but interesting read none the less.

Edited August 3, 2013 by LordArtemis