F2p PVP and P2p PVP no different if devs get their way.

[Nickious]

I'm glad its becoming a ftp feature. I want more players to crush. Besides, no doubt, most ftp will be undergeared and will have gimped payout compared to the sub player.

[JattaGin]

But, Swtor is supposed to become a pure F2P game. I don't understand that there are still so many players who haven't understood this. They want us subs gone. The game is much easier and cheaper to handle without subs demanding stuff without wanting to pay for the particular thing.

 

This PvP update makes perfect sense to me. They will continue to make our subs worth less and less until finally all subs are gone. Then they make big money with CC. And that's exactly why I will stay sub until the end. Just to annoy BW.

[LordArtemis]

More warm bodies is a good thing IMO. I am fine with this. I am more concerned with the inclusion of Arenas and what effect it will have on the balance of the game....I will be very disappointed if we begin a never ending balance quest like what happened with WoW....due directly to trying to balance the game based on Arena performance.

[Andryah]

There are people including myself who subscribe for just pvp. if you remove the warzone restrictions for f2p (as hinted in the dev post) why should said group of subscribers continue paying and supporting the game. taking 8 man ranked from us and giving us 3 arenas and the promise of f2p players stinks tbh

 

Do you actually think that they won't replace the WZ passes with something equally desirable to the non-subscribers? Really?

 

Here's a tip: WZs will be free... but ranked arena play.... not free... and a return of ranked 8v8 WZs... also not free. Subs will have unrestricted access of course. Putting ranked play behind passes for nonsubs makes a lot of sense actually.

 

Trust me... they will put something desireable in to replace what is retired to the free bucket. That is precisely what freemium MMOs have been doing for several years now.

 

Now go fix your shorts... because you appear to have them bunched tightly up where the sun don't shine.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Andryah

[Callaron]

Unless I'm mistaken they still need artifact authorization too, if they want to be able to compete properly.

[DarkDisturbed]

I think you read it wrong, they said Warzones, not PvP. I doubt F2P can participate in Arenas at all, or if they can, it's limited harshly.

[RaiderMid]

Do you actually think that they won't replace the WZ passes with something equally desirable to the non-subscribers? Really?

 

Here's a tip: WZs will be free... but ranked arena play.... not free... and a return of ranked 8v8 WZs... also not free. Subs will have unrestricted access of course. Putting ranked play behind passes for nonsubs makes a lot of sense actually.

 

Trust me... they will put something desireable in to replace what is retired to the free bucket. That is precisely what freemium MMOs have been doing for several years now.

 

Now go fix your shorts... because you appear to have them bunched tightly up where the sun don't shine.

 

It probably won't matter to F2P players if they restrict arenas. The hardcore pvp players will likely be subs anyways. Opening up WZ's for F2P players will give the F2P players a way to grind XP more than anything in my opinion.

[Andryah]

It probably won't matter to F2P players if they restrict arenas. The hardcore pvp players will likely be subs anyways. Opening up WZ's for F2P players will give the F2P players a way to grind XP more than anything in my opinion.

 

I agree with you......though I am sure there are plenty of hardcore PvP who would like full access to PvP with no sub required.

[captpickles]

There are people including myself who subscribe for just pvp. if you remove the warzone restrictions for f2p (as hinted in the dev post) why should said group of subscribers continue paying and supporting the game. taking 8 man ranked from us and giving us 3 arenas and the promise of f2p players stinks tbh

 

 

awww poor elitist have booboo?

 

hahahahahahahahah get used to it. more content than this will have increased access to f2p and prefered f2p because there making more money off of cc buys than subs...

[Kilora]

awww poor elitist have booboo?

 

hahahahahahahahah get used to it. more content than this will have increased access to f2p and prefered f2p because there making more money off of cc buys than subs...

 

Yes, but quite often subs are spending $ on a sub AND a significant amount of money on CCs.

 

I'd be willing to wager a bet that this game would be raking in just as much money if they lowered the sub to $10, added in the cash shop, but didn't make it F2P.

 

People with poor impulse control are often times already subscribing to the game. =D

[LordArtemis]

F2P is the market. We can wax poetic about the wonderful experience of riding in a horse drawn cart, but the fact is automobiles are here to stay, like it or not.

 

That does not mean IMO there is not reason to lament the passing of the traditional MMO model as it transitions away into history...but it is not realistic to try and fight against the inevitable.

 

This is the market. It is likely what the market wants. With a few notable exceptions the market only supports hybrid or pure F2P models, and the most successful games on the market now are F2P...not subscription based. WoT is the number one worldwide MMO at the moment. Number two is the game it unseated....LoL.

 

Both games far exceed the player levels of WoW. In fact, WoT has almost 4 times the players that WoW had at it's peak in 2010...standing at 45 million.

 

And that doesn't even count social games.

 

This is an unstoppable force IMO.

Edited August 16, 2013 by LordArtemis

[metalfenix]

I really don't know what's wrong. more bodies for ya pvpers to slaughter, and they still can't access the purple gear that subs may get.

[Kamansus]

I doubt ranked PvP will be an option for F2P players.

 

This. They're just allowing them into what is now an unranked only game type. They said nothing of arenas, and I wouldn't be surprised if a new pass appears on the CM for them.

 

But no everybody, QQ MOAR ABOUT FREE THINGS.

[shadowrouge]

Am I the only person seeing the fact that free players will have nothing to use but bolster, and subscribers get to wear their pvp purples they earn? I thought it was kind of obvious.

 

Free players interested in pvp get to mess around, but can never top out if they want to be serious. That's the lure to buy a subscription or at the very least buy a crappy temp gear license.

 

Except they can BUY and unlock and wear those purples too. So they spend maybe 20 bucks max. Get to wear the pretty purples like subs. Little revenue and F2P can now wear what subs were. No change. Except the fact BW now loses subs from the crowd that only PVP's.

Like was said above. less revenue less new content.

[DaShuk]

An influx of noobs into PVP...wow the Republic side is going to stink even more, lol

[Aries_cz]

An influx of noobs into PVP...wow the Republic side is going to stink even more, lol

 

Actually most F2P noobs are on Imperial side, because they love to be "so evulz"

[danielearley]

I'm not sure if I understand the OP complaint!

 

If I get it right he's complaining because he no long needs subscribe to do what he wants to do.

 

I would call him an idiot but that would be against forum rules, so I will stick with it being me confused!

[Przemo_No]

I'm not sure if I understand the OP complaint!

 

If I get it right he's complaining because he no long needs subscribe to do what he wants to do.

 

I would call him an idiot but that would be against forum rules, so I will stick with it being me confused!

 

LOL

 

Additionally that would mean, more wins, more medals, faster rank growth...

so what's to complain about, indeed?

[Elfa]

Dunno why you're complaining. More bodies to drop. right?

 

...and that is exactly why they're doing it, they're trying to help eliminate those long queue times by quadrupling the amount of folks that can regularly do it. By opening it up to F2P like this, your queue time will approach instant and you'll spend far less of your payed subscriber time standing on fleet being an insufferable git.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Elfa

[Helig]

This thread is the perfect example of "Damned if you do, damned if you don't".

 

First, people complained that BW imposes ridiculous restrictions, positively extorting money from players to make the game playable. Now, they lift some of those restrictions and there are still those that choose to complain.

...and that is exactly why they're doing it, they're trying to help eliminate those long queue times by quadrupling the amount of folks that can regularly do it. By opening it up to F2P like this, your queue time will approach instant and you'll spend far less of your payed subscriber time standing on fleet being an insufferable git.

^

Good post.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Helig

[Drudenfusz]

I play mostly PvP and have a sup and will keep it that way. And I think it is a great idea to open it up (or better, it was a really stupid idea to have it that restricted in the first place). Still I wouldn't be too surprised if BioWare still has some restriction then for f2p members, who knows if they can even enter ranked games then. Or they get far less commentations or whathaveyou... I am pretty sure BioWare will try to give the subscribers still an edge then.

[Dawginole]

because it's a fact, despite what pvp'ers tell themselves, that PVP is a small portion of the playerbase and most are here for the PvE

 

you seem to forget that BioWare has their fabled "metrics" that tells them exactly who's doing what and how many there are...they wouldn't be doing this if the sub PvP'ers were a significant portion of the playerbase...they'd lose money.

 

fact.

 

Depends how you look at metrics. On one hand pvp numbers can be low and that's a sign of its popularity. On the other hand a low metric could be a sign of participation drop off because of the lack of new content. i.e. If WZs received three new maps every 6 months and PvEers were still playing the same two Ops introduced at launch, which do you think would have a higher participation percentage.

 

Not as cut and dry as you think it is.

[oaceen]

LOL

 

Additionally that would mean, more wins, more medals, faster rank growth...

so what's to complain about, indeed?

 

i think it's people just like to complain.

[Turtletoad]

I think its great, while every team is going to lose because it will be people who never did wz ever, I'll get 20000000000000 at least and will end with every medal besides the the ones for finishing quickly.

[ImpactHound]

F2P is the market. We can wax poetic about the wonderful experience of riding in a horse drawn cart, but the fact is automobiles are here to stay, like it or not.

 

That does not mean IMO there is not reason to lament the passing of the traditional MMO model as it transitions away into history...but it is not realistic to try and fight against the inevitable.

 

This is the market. It is likely what the market wants. With a few notable exceptions the market only supports hybrid or pure F2P models, and the most successful games on the market now are F2P...not subscription based. WoT is the number one worldwide MMO at the moment. Number two is the game it unseated....LoL.

 

Both games far exceed the player levels of WoW. In fact, WoT has almost 4 times the players that WoW had at it's peak in 2010...standing at 45 million.

 

And that doesn't even count social games.

 

This is an unstoppable force IMO.

 

First of all, World of Tanks & League of Legends aren't MMOs. They have a large number of players, but they are not "massively multiplayer" any more than Diablo or Quake. Second, the player numbers are massively inflated; it's confirmed that many active League of Legends players have multiple accounts for either "smurfing" or using the refferal program to refer themselves to both smurf to Account level 5 & then get an IP boost and other rewards on their main account, not to mention just having alt names for solo or clan play. Runescape is another hilarious example, you get ONE character per account, so if you have alts, you have mulitple accounts. It puts their 200 million account record into perspective when there's typically only 100k players logged in at any one time.

 

The only reason World of Tanks & League of Legends are ever put on MMO site hubs is advertising.