We Need Clarification

[Raansu]

I'm with you on this. I pay monthly and pay heavily into the CM. I enjoy options, and I am glad people have more than ONE avenue by which to achieve something.

 

This right here is 100% the problem. People like you are the reason why subscribers get treated the way they do. It's amazing that you don't see what is wrong with what you just posted.

[Heezdedjim]

This right here is 100% the problem. People like you are the reason why subscribers get treated the way they do.

It's amazing that you don't see what is wrong with what you just posted.

[Ratajack]

Having BOTH allows the option to use EITHER. People complain all day long about being forced to do something when there is no other option. They've provided options, and people STILL complain. They need to remove the Legacy requirement all together and make it X number of CCs -- OR -- 1M Creds. If the legacy wasn't tied to this companion, this thread would have died on page 1.

 

You are correct there. You neglect to mention that if legacy were not required to purchase the companion with credits this NEVER would have been an issue, as the "have to have it now" crowd without legacy 40 would not have had to beg, plead and whine to have the option to pay to BYPASS that legacy requirement.

[SweetsPatogga]

This right here is 100% the problem. People like you are the reason why subscribers get treated the way they do. It's amazing that you don't see what is wrong with what you just posted.

 

The game was not doing well financially with just a monthly subscription model before the cartel market came along. It doesn't matter if you like the cartel market or the people who use it or not, it's supporting the game that you play and keeping it going. Without it the alternative might have been pulling the plug.

[Ratajack]

The options to keep everyone happy are already present. It just so happens that the players who support your opinion are not satisified with everyone getting what they want. You guys simply want to get what you want whilst at the same time, penalising and taking away the options of the other crowd....

 

 

Driz

 

That is where I believe you are wrong. It's not so much that people want to "take away options". It's more that people want the playing field evened out.

 

Why should a legacy requirement be tied to one currency and not the other? If neither credits nor CC's had a legacy requirement, I doubt many would have a problem with the option to use credits or CC's. If both options required legacy 40, I doubt that many would have a problem with the option to use credits or CC's.

 

Where people have a problem is that if a player wants to use credits to purchase the companion, they need legacy 40, but if that same player wants to throw money at BW, there is no legacy requirement.

[Meleemilan]

That is where I believe you are wrong. It's not so much that people want to "take away options". It's more that people want the playing field evened out.

 

Why should a legacy requirement be tied to one currency and not the other? If neither credits nor CC's had a legacy requirement, I doubt many would have a problem with the option to use credits or CC's. If both options required legacy 40, I doubt that many would have a problem with the option to use credits or CC's.

 

Where people have a problem is that if a player wants to use credits to purchase the companion, they need legacy 40, but if that same player wants to throw money at BW, there is no legacy requirement.

 

The thing you don't seem to get, is that it's not like that to please any of the crowds.It,S like that because they invested millions in the game, and the original subscription model did not work, it simply would not pay the investment quick enough to be a viable revenue source, because F2P becomes the current norm for MMOs. Now, If they were to easy up the way to get it with credits and make it as easy for both, it would be shooting themselves in the foot. Look at it this way: they need money to pay the game. IF they were to limit Treek to be bought for credits + legacy only, it would give them absolutely nothing. IF they were to give it CC and credits, without legacy, it would be the same: everyone would take the one mil credits option, and up with the free Treek, costing no CC for you and no time. That would still not help repaying the millions invested and giving a good enough profit for the game. Now, what they thought, which is the logical way of thinking it, you pay money, and support the game and get it, or you work hard and earn it. Now if they were to put Legacy 40 on both currency, that would still be shooting themselves in the foot. Look at that this way: nobody would buy it for CCs because if you get legacy 40, you can, anyway, still buy it for 1 mil credits, and less people are going to get it, anyway because legacy 40 is an hard achievement for some players that are not necessarily playing all the time and having 70 alts everywhere, so they'd just say, "forget it I'm not working for that, it's only a crew member, it's absolutely not worth leveling legacy for that". And Bioware would still not get any money. If they were to do it the way you thing it should be, the game would simply stop existing by having less profits. And then goodbye all your hard work that you would have done to earn it, it would all be gone with the game. Even if I still believe they should have stayed on the subscription model, I totally understand that they had to go for a F2P model, and do this kind of things.

[Raansu]

The game was not doing well financially with just a monthly subscription model before the cartel market came along. It doesn't matter if you like the cartel market or the people who use it or not, it's supporting the game that you play and keeping it going. Without it the alternative might have been pulling the plug.

 

That doesn't excuse the fact that the game does still have a subscription model and they do get treated like crap. They pretty much never add anything worth of value to a subscriber anymore, everything is cartel. The collections thing alone is a good example of how something should of been free to subscribers and a purchase for F2P. Having a hybrid model at this point is a mockery and they either need to put more effort into adding things specifically for subscribers or just go to a full F2P model because aside from end game content there is ZERO incentive to stay subscribed to this game. Sadly I doubt BW even cares anymore about subscribers as long as the fresh freebies roll in and purchase off the cartel.

[curtkram]

The thing you don't seem to get, is that it's not like that to please any of the crowds.It,S like that because they invested millions in the game, and the original subscription model did not work, it simply would not pay the investment quick enough to be a viable revenue source, because F2P becomes the current norm for MMOs. Now, If they were to easy up the way to get it with credits and make it as easy for both, it would be shooting themselves in the foot. Look at it this way: they need money to pay the game. IF they were to limit Treek to be bought for credits + legacy only, it would give them absolutely nothing. IF they were to give it CC and credits, without legacy, it would be the same: everyone would take the one mil credits option, and up with the free Treek, costing no CC for you and no time. That would still not help repaying the millions invested and giving a good enough profit for the game. Now, what they thought, which is the logical way of thinking it, you pay money, and support the game and get it, or you work hard and earn it. Now if they were to put Legacy 40 on both currency, that would still be shooting themselves in the foot. Look at that this way: nobody would buy it for CCs because if you get legacy 40, you can, anyway, still buy it for 1 mil credits, and less people are going to get it, anyway because legacy 40 is an hard achievement for some players that are not necessarily playing all the time and having 70 alts everywhere, so they'd just say, "forget it I'm not working for that, it's only a crew member, it's absolutely not worth leveling legacy for that". And Bioware would still not get any money. If they were to do it the way you thing it should be, the game would simply stop existing by having less profits. And then goodbye all your hard work that you would have done to earn it, it would all be gone with the game. Even if I still believe they should have stayed on the subscription model, I totally understand that they had to go for a F2P model, and do this kind of things.

 

you seem to think that the reason they initially failed is because people couldn't buy their way past the content of the game. that's not true. the content of the game isn't as bad as you guys are making it out to be. it can be a fun game to play. this game initially failed after normal attrition happened. some people left because they tried the game and didn't want to keep a sub up, or lack of end game, or whatever. apparently this happens in all MMOs. for this MMO, that left a bunch of empty servers, because they expanded too fast. their subscribers came to the forums in droves asking them to fix it, but instead of listening to those of us who actually like the game, they listened to people like andryah who told them everything was fine, and they just sat back while watching their game die. in addition to that they released legacy, which made it a lot harder for them to fix the server problem once they couldn't ignore it anymore. most of the people in charge of that group lost their jobs because they weren't competent. to reiterate, that failure had nothing to do with buying your way past content. if bioware listened to their customers, they could have stopped the bleeding a lot sooner.

 

swtor is now f2p. that's not a "current norm." that means this game is now second tier, and no longer competing with games that have remained profitable for a long time with a subscription. other games switched to f2p once they got old. this one switched because the devs were unwilling to listen to the customers and unable to react to what was happening in their game.

 

now, maybe their financials are such that they are still a hair's breadth from bankruptcy. i don't know if that's true, but i kind of doubt it. there are other MMOs with less people that are still running. of course, this one is still being ridiculously mismanaged, so it's hard to tell. i would suggest if they want to stay profitable, they should be focusing on a steady source of income rather than a quick monthly bump. your solution of selling ewoks to people who don't want to play the game would only provide a quick bump. i really don't think people are going to stay subscribed to this game for very long if all they do is log in, say 'hi,' buy and ewok, and go to bed. there isn't a compelling reason to stick around in that scenario. of course i could be wrong, and maybe there is something you folks find entertaining that i don't understand. otherwise, a successful game would have content to play and goals to try to achieve. offering an option to buy your way past the game's content takes away the incentive to try to reach those goals.

[Superman_AZ]

This right here is 100% the problem. People like you are the reason why subscribers get treated the way they do. It's amazing that you don't see what is wrong with what you just posted.

People get treated the way they do because Bioware refuses to treat their people any better. You people seem to fail at grasping this notion. If Bioware were more like Blizzard, we would all be treated equally... poorly, but equally. So, you wanna be mad about something? Be mad at Bioware for turning the game Free to Play with a cash shop. I didn't beg them to do it, but I will sure as heck use it since it exists. Problems? Talk to BW. I didn't make this mess, I'm just working with it.

[GhostShaman]

People get treated the way they do because Bioware refuses to treat their people any better. You people seem to fail at grasping this notion. If Bioware were more like Blizzard, we would all be treated equally... poorly, but equally. So, you wanna be mad about something? Be mad at Bioware for turning the game Free to Play with a cash shop. I didn't beg them to do it, but I will sure as heck use it since it exists. Problems? Talk to BW. I didn't make this mess, I'm just working with it.

 

I am, and Im tired of game content being put into a cash grab scenario yet again. This "expansion" was nothing more than a DLC that they wanted to make a cash grab for. Wookie life day event got canned and items put in the CM. Treek....do I even need to say more. For some of us we are *********** sick of the constant cash grab. Take the time and fix the product, invest in story, invest in space, get legacy perks, and stop having every *********** little thing release in the CM. Consumables and a few outfits should be in there, and thats it! Anything else is taking away from potential game play and experience.

[astrobearx]

I am, and Im tired of game content being put into a cash grab scenario yet again. This "expansion" was nothing more than a DLC that they wanted to make a cash grab for. Wookie life day event got canned and items put in the CM. Treek....do I even need to say more. For some of us we are *********** sick of the constant cash grab. Take the time and fix the product, invest in story, invest in space, get legacy perks, and stop having every *********** little thing release in the CM. Consumables and a few outfits should be in there, and thats it! Anything else is taking away from potential game play and experience.

 

1. you mean YOUR GAMEPLAY AND EXPERIENCE. you dont speak for the rest of us.

 

2. yeah if you are so tired of the crap that going on....why are you still playing? i can guarantee you that the current road map isnt gonna change because a few people on a f2p is screaming. so if you the fact that the cash shop is gonna be king, then i suggest to find something else.

[curtkram]

1. you mean YOUR GAMEPLAY AND EXPERIENCE. you dont speak for the rest of us.

 

his statement is pretty accurate.

 

look at 2 alternatives, his idea of "gameplay" and your idea of "gameplay." his idea is to play a game. there would be some sort of content that would generally fall under the definition of what a "game" is; very vague but specific enough to separate "game" from "not game."

 

what he is suggesting is taking away from "gameplay" is the cartel market, where you buy stuff. if your idea of "gameplay" is buying stuff from the cartel market, that's excluded from his statement because it's not a "game." the cartel market is retail. people don't "play" retail. granted, you may enjoy the experience of buying stuff from the cartel market more than you enjoy playing the game, but you shouldn't be implying that buying retail stuff falls under "gameplay." it does not.

 

by definition of what a "game" is, his statement dose not exclude you from enjoying your time buying stuff from the cartel market. you shouldn't get upset and yell in all caps just because you like the retail experience more than the game experience.

[Superman_AZ]

You are correct there. You neglect to mention that if legacy were not required to purchase the companion with credits this NEVER would have been an issue, as the "have to have it now" crowd without legacy 40 would not have had to beg, plead and whine to have the option to pay to BYPASS that legacy requirement.

Believe it or not, I would imagine BW knew this little companion would make money. And, since they are "for-profit" and not a charity contrary to their free-to-play model, they likely put it in the CM as a money maker... and not because people whined and begged for it. You are blaming players when you should be angry with Bioware. Your entire "have to have it now crowd" argument is old... and frankly, incorrect. Start looking at the SOURCE of the concern, and not those who are simply playing by the rules with BIOWARE has laid out for them.

[GhostShaman]

his statement is pretty accurate.

 

look at 2 alternatives, his idea of "gameplay" and your idea of "gameplay." his idea is to play a game. there would be some sort of content that would generally fall under the definition of what a "game" is; very vague but specific enough to separate "game" from "not game."

 

what he is suggesting is taking away from "gameplay" is the cartel market, where you buy stuff. if your idea of "gameplay" is buying stuff from the cartel market, that's excluded from his statement because it's not a "game." the cartel market is retail. people don't "play" retail. granted, you may enjoy the experience of buying stuff from the cartel market more than you enjoy playing the game, but you shouldn't be implying that buying retail stuff falls under "gameplay." it does not.

 

by definition of what a "game" is, his statement dose not exclude you from enjoying your time buying stuff from the cartel market. you shouldn't get upset and yell in all caps just because you like the retail experience more than the game experience.

 

^ Pretty much this

 

and I have said this more than enough in this thread, I should put TL;DR somewhere in my last rant.

[Ayelinna]

1. you mean YOUR GAMEPLAY AND EXPERIENCE. you dont speak for the rest of us.

 

2. yeah if you are so tired of the crap that going on....why are you still playing? i can guarantee you that the current road map isnt gonna change because a few people on a f2p is screaming. so if you the fact that the cash shop is gonna be king, then i suggest to find something else.

 

Lol classic argument... "dont like it? dont play it".

 

Bioware are focusing too much on the CM and cash grab schemes and it kinda annoys people that they're doing that.

[Superman_AZ]

Lol classic argument... "dont like it? dont play it".

 

Bioware are focusing too much on the CM and cash grab schemes and it kinda annoys people that they're doing that.

Heaven forbid a for-profit company try to make a profit.

[chuuuuucky]

Heaven forbid a for-profit company try to make a profit.

 

So what i wonder with this statement is if every nasty business practice is welcome as long as it makes profit?

Is that somethiong like a common mentality in your country that companys have to threat at least part of their customers bad in order to generate profit?

Again i could quote my long post from yesterday where i asked why people are so feared of the game getting shut down that they agree with every bad business decision Bioware is making. Or what else is it that people like you just swallow every bitter pill because well Bioware decided to do it that way. You know what the Eve players did the last time ccp tried to screw them? Tenthousands cancelled their sub and came back after ccp decided to rethink their incarna expansion.

That is the way you have to go if something is completely out of hand. With Treek we are not on a point to cancel our subs but we have to tell them that they shouldn't do this again, alternatives can be found in every thread about the Ewok.

[GhostShaman]

Heaven forbid a for-profit company try to make a profit.

 

Your for profit argument is getting old. It doesnt work like that, you can not forecast with erratic markets. You need a steady flow of income like subs.

[Andryah]

Your for profit argument is getting old. It doesnt work like that, you can not forecast with erratic markets. You need a steady flow of income like subs.

 

Your cash grab argument is beyond old.

 

Your "steady flow" of income is bias because you don't like a flexible access model AND it is incorrect.

 

The fact is, MMO companies have proven for years now that a flexible model works, is profitable, and from an operations standpoint is a predictable as a subscriber only model. How? Well.. you see.. there is this little issue with subscriptions.. people come and people go.. and so subscription only business revenue is no more predictable then the revenue from a flexible access model. Subscription forecasts are just erratic as any other revenue forecast for a business. In fact.. forecasting Is a predictive business modeling exercise, often wrong and used only as a forward estimator for validating an operations plan.

Edited July 9, 2013 by Andryah

[Andryah]

Lol classic argument... "dont like it? dont play it".

 

Bioware are focusing too much on the CM and cash grab schemes and it kinda annoys people that they're doing that.

 

Well, you got the plural correct, but you need to insert "some" in front of "people". Some people are annoyed that they are doing it. Some people are annoyed about just about anything and everything in any given MMO. But it's different people for different annoyances.

 

And you might as well settle in with your annoyance, because they are not changing just because a minority interests vocalizes their annoyance.

[Andryah]

his statement is pretty accurate.

 

Only for him. Even if you agree with him.. it's still only accurate for him. Your statements are accurate for you. My statements are accurate for me. And so on and so on.

[Superman_AZ]

Your cash grab argument is beyond old.

 

Your "steady flow" of income is bias because you don't like a flexible access model AND it is incorrect.

 

The fact is, MMO companies have proven for years now that a flexible model works, is profitable, and from an operations standpoint is a predictable as a subscriber only model. How? Well.. you see.. there is this little issue with subscriptions.. people come and people go.. and so subscription only business revenue is no more predictable then the revenue from a flexible access model. Subscription forecasts are just erratic as any other revenue forecast for a business. In fact.. forecasting Is a predictive business modeling exercise, often wrong and used only as a forward estimator for validating an operations plan.

Thank you Andryah. Could not have said it better myself. As for anyone who doubts the CM supports the game financially.... BOOM!

[curtkram]

Your cash grab argument is beyond old.

 

Your "steady flow" of income is bias because you don't like a flexible access model AND it is incorrect.

 

The fact is, MMO companies have proven for years now that a flexible model works, is profitable, and from an operations standpoint is a predictable as a subscriber only model. How? Well.. you see.. there is this little issue with subscriptions.. people come and people go.. and so subscription only business revenue is no more predictable then the revenue from a flexible access model. Subscription forecasts are just erratic as any other revenue forecast for a business. In fact.. forecasting Is a predictive business modeling exercise, often wrong and used only as a forward estimator for validating an operations plan.

 

if that's a "fact," why wasn't swtor developed as a f2p game? remember when they released as a subscription only model, because that's what top tier MMOs do? they switched to f2p when all their subs quit, because they refused to listen to their players and were unable to react to what was happening in their game. it took them months to develop f2p too, because it wasn't written into the game from the start. in the beginning, they never had any intention of going f2p, because that's not what top tier MMOs do.

 

remember the yoshi-p final fantasy interview? subscription MMOs provide stable income and loyalty to the people who play the game. f2p is to get cash quick to satisfy investors. aka, cash grab. btw, yoshi-p makes games, so his credibility should not be the same as a forum troll.

 

here is a forum thread from 12/21/11 that might explain what really happened, but without the revisionist history you're so fond of. remember, this is not the current game. this is right after release, long before f2p was actually announced.

 

 

So after playing beta, EGA and the first few days of launch, I predict that SWTOR will go F2P in about six months.

 

Lazy

 

This is perhaps the biggest misstep. Biowhore and Evil Arts cut corners by licensing the HeroEngine instead of developing their own. Now, as a developer professionally, I would normally say "Good for them," but it is painfully clear not much money went into developing this engine into something for a AAA MMO. As of 9/2011, the engine still does not support multiple cores nor a 64-bit client. Even WoW supports multiple cores and a 64-bit client.

 

This is sloth, and the fact that BW/EA did not bother to invest in the backbone of this game. Players will burn through your content and dialog. And when they get into the routine of playing the repetitive parts of the game, they will really start to notice how little was put into this engine.

 

Ignoring your users

 

The community management sucks. The interaction is canned corporate responses. There is no detail, the only admitted problem is Taris and that's only because quite literally hundreds of players have fallen into a figurative black hole on that world. This is a poor way to treat your community. To treat them like children. As if giving them information is something they could not handle. Your customers are not asking you to cater to their every whim (well, most of them), but they do enjoy having information that allows them to make informed decisions... like... do they actually need to upgrade, or do you have a really crappy, inefficient engine that you'll eventually patch and do we just suffer or spend our money to get new hardware. Stuff like that. This smacks of pride.

 

Being greedy

 

Another major misstep here was the revocation of a grace period and only reinstating a small span of time after the community set you on fire for it. Given the insanity of the postal services during this time of year, the seven day grace period would have shown forethought and consideration. Can't let those players play an extra week! They could be giving us money instead!

 

Given the fact that this is EA, if the cost of maintaining a viable player base, due to initial craptacular implementation or lack of project planning, costs more money, they are going to court the players until they at least make ends meet so they can save some face in front of the investors. Then they will begin hiking back resources to adding or supporting this game and ultimately F2P with microtransactions.

 

One of the reasons WoW did so well was that Blizzard had all its eggs in that basket. SCII and D3 were not coming out for a long, long time and SC:Ghost was scrapped. They had to stick it out and make it profitable and look at it now. Be sure, if EA can figure out the numbers to make their enterprise more profitable that does not involve SWTOR (in the short term), they'll cut this project quick.

 

Fostering anger in their community

 

This one is on the community management again. They foster this environment. Poor details, poor handling of users, poor customer service. Closing duplicate threads with the snarky "Go here" as if to hide the sheer number of pissed off people. It all contributes to the community's anger at how this is being mishandled. Eventually, that anger is going to translate into people not staying past the free 30 days.

 

WoW Clone, Family Guy Style

 

This game is WoW without all the bells in whistles. It starts out sleeker than WoW, but is missing things that are pretty integral to WoW's success during the end of Vanilla and Burning Crusade. A solid end-game, both PvE and PvP. Better community tools like a group finder (I mean a group finder, not a cross-faction hullabaloo) and so forth. Three years and 100 million dollars for a watered down WoW clone with an exhaustible story and thoroughly abused IP.

 

Engorging your servers

 

I chalk this up to servers. Yes, everyone has launch issues, but given the fact that they put us through that painful EGA, you would think they would have put in the infrastructure to migrate your character to a different one, put in some server caps to prevent qs and everything else. Nope, not happening. So instead they have engorged themselves on players and we are all suffering for it.

 

And with these missteps, I call it here and now. F2P in 6 mos. It will not go away, but I seriously doubt you will see much more polish.

 

 

why would you want to sabotage the game you play by making all of these false statements about the state of the game? be honest. they can fix the game. they can make it better. there is a checklist. all they have to do is pay attention. repeating the "everything is alright" mantra, and blaming "the industry" for their screw ups, does not help them address their problems. you're just rewarding negative behavior.

 

this isn't a bad quote from you back in the day:

 

F2P has generally been good for LOTRO lifetime subscription holders, as it kept the game open, expansions coming, and free Turbine points every month.

 

IMO, F2P won't do well with SWTOR, even if they did the LOTRO model.

 

so what we learned here is, top tier MMOs do not go f2p. swtor went f2p because they were lazy, ignored their users, greedy, fostered anger, WoW clone, and generally messed up server management. f2p is not good for swtor (according to andryah), f2p is good for swtor (according to andryah).

 

maybe if you came on here and politely asked them to fix their game instead of incessantly defending obviously bad decisions and bad behavior, maybe they would move the game in a direction that is actually stable, with updates to the actual "game" instead of just the cartel market.

 

and to close, words from the former CEO John Riccitiello:

 

"There's a lot of power in free-to-play. For what it's worth, free-to-play is anything but free. We have lots of games that are quote-unquote free-to-play where the paying user is giving us 10, 20, even 30 dollars a month. What happens is the first gameplay is free, and then when you get further into the game, you have to pay for things."

 

cash grab argument is as relevant and valid as it's always been.

[Superman_AZ]

if that's a "fact," why wasn't swtor developed as a f2p game?

 

cash grab argument is as relevant and valid as it's always been.

A steady profit from subs is always preferred. Flexible income would be second in the scheme of things. Free to Play without any revenue source is just dead last, and begging for bankruptcy.

 

The reason the "cash grab" argument is invalid, is because first and for most, this is a for-profit company. Nothing is completely free. Even the "free" sub has its extreme limitations and requires some form of cash to be spent to maximize your end game result. It is unlikely anyone has played this game and not spent a single cent.

 

If there is a way to turn a profit on a failed product, that is actually a success to the makers of the product. The biggest failure in the game was marketing and implementation. Had it gone smoother, subs never would have fallen off, Free-to-Play never would have been implemented, and the Cartel Market would be an in-game market using Creds instead of Cartel Coins.

[Andryah]

if that's a "fact," why wasn't swtor developed as a f2p game?

 

Simple.

 

1) They began development before the Freemium/F2P model had taken permanent root in the genre.

 

2) They arrogantly thought they could buck the strongly growing trend in the genre to freemium. They took the risk, they failed. If they had released 3 years earlier.. they probably could have pulled it off.. but they did not have a game at that time. In hindsight... they should have gone Freemium from day one, but hey.. they have as much as openly admitted this... but that's hindsight.

 

The real credit they are due, and not given by biased negative players like yourself, is they took an MMO that was in a tailspin (largely due to their decisions in conjunction with some pragmatic market realities) and pulled it up and into stable flight. Many MMOs have been pulled out of tailspins over the years.. but this was the biggest and the best return to stable flight in the industry. They deserve a lot of credit for that IMO.

 

By the way... Funcom did the same thing with TSW.. except they designed it from day one to flip to Freemium because they knew the risk but wanted to take the gamble anyway.