Is the F2P/Preffered system too prohibitive, and if so, what should change?

[OddballEasyEight]

In all honesty, F2P has no universal definition past "I am playing without spending a single cent".

 

http://www.swtor.com/info/overview <--- what can we read just under the usual PR BS?

 

 

 

So, it`s NOT F2P - you are playing up to lvl 50 with some restrictions, or become a sub. People tend to read what they want to read, but this is not the case - the norm, or standard is STILL the subscription - the only difference being that freeloaders get to load the game and play it to some extent, as opposed to the 2012 state of things, which required the client bought and a sub plan set.

 

But when the game went F2P you could play to levelcap without paying a dime.

The fact that you cannot enjoy the benefits of the expansion without subscribing OR paying for the expansion does not stop the base game from being F2P

[DarthTHC]

You said "what's in a name" referring to the title "subscription".

You weren't talking about personal names. You were implying that changing the title of something makes no difference because a title or name has no inherent power. You ware very wrong on that.

 

No, really, the word "subscriber", "VIP", or whatever carries no "power". It's the way people (mis-)interpret the words that might have power and that's on them. The name we use for "people who pay monthly" matters not one bit within the context of the conversation. It's always going to mean "people who pay monthly" and it's always going to be only a subset of the revenue.

 

This isn't a "mixed revenue model" that can be compared to WoW. WoW is not F2P with a subscription option.

World of Tanks is a F2P with a subscription option.

And nobody ever starts arguing about how many subscribers WoT has... since they are not called subscribers.

 

Again... who cares if someone wants to wrap their gray matter around the axle because they're fooling themselves into thinking the title, "subscriber" matters?

[OddballEasyEight]

I had my sub lapse for a few days last month, and I did find one restriction very bad. Titles.

In the game you earn titles by doing certain things. Leave ambassador behind on Esseles? get a title. Kill fat boss on Sith Warrior? get Darth.

And yet even though these are things f2p, preferred and subs can do and get, non subs can use it? That honestly, is messed up. Non subs get so very little. At least let them show off the things they CAN do..

 

You do know you can unlock that without paying a dime of real money right?

[Sidenti]

Responses in orange.

 

I am of the opinion that there are three distinct weaknesses in the current F2P/Preferred system that do not lend themselves to promote growth for this title. They are, as follows....

 

1) Lack of ability to more than one item and money between legacy characters on the same account. Perfectly fine. Preferred gets to mail stuff as they should for financially supporting the game at some point in time. F2Ps should rightfully be shut out of the mail system except for the ability to retrieve things from GTN. They don't pay to maintain the game and are therefore a drain on resourcs.

2) Constant spam to indicate that you have reached credit cap. That's called "marketing".

3) Lack of ability for F2P and Preferred players to openly communicate among themselves in game (lack of a chat channel for F2P) And with good reason - features cost money to add and maintain. Preferred had their chat feature fixed; F2P needs no fixes (and frankly, that's an anti-spam measure, keeping them squelched until level 10. It SHOULD be level 20.)

 

I also feel that a third tier is missing from the mix, a "Veteran" tier if you will, one that removes most (but not all) of the remaining restrictions for preferred players if they have subscribed to the game for at least 180 days in the lifetime of the account. Nah. The three tiers we have work rather well. F2P gets the bare-bones experience, Preferred gets recognized for their past contributions despite the fact that, in many cases, they're not regular contributions, and Subscribers rightfully get access to everything because without the subscribers the whole system goes straight to hell.

 

These are the only remaining weaknesses of the current model IMO. Below are my suggestions for each.

1) Allow folks to purchase an unlock that will open up legacy mail. I can agree with that if we're talking an artifact-quality item much like Equipment Authorization or Unify Colors.

2) Either remove the sound effect from the coin limit spam, or space it out over, say, every ten deposits.Nah. Then it's not as effective a marketing tool. Understand that it's structured specifically to annoy you into buying something. That's why it's called a "nag".

3) Add a channel to the chat box that would exist for free and preferred players to openly chat among themselves. Subscribers would naturally be able to participate, or could simply ignore it. Absolutely not. I can tell you from personal experience that setting communication limitations is EXTREMELY effective in converting freeps and preems to subscriber status. Wanna talk? Gotta pay. Free speech ain't free.

 

As far as the "Veteran" tier, I have a list of changes that I will post later after some editing.

 

I would like to hear some other opinions on this, even those that wish for more restrictions, not less. Thanks for reading.System seems to be fine the way it is. Consider a subscription if you don't like the restrictions. -bp

Edited May 21, 2014 by Sidenti

[Sidenti]

They don't spend nothing... and one day, they spend a lot on something they really want. And 2 months later, they do it again because they forget the previous one or because it's easier the second time.

 

But the important point is that Bioware doesn't pay nothing for us. No ingame request, no customer service, no moderation and better : free players have no priority to access the server. They only take the vacancies.

They are free to Bioware.

 

...I'd like to introduce you to a little concept called "bandwidth costs". Freeps do indeed cost Bioware money, because Bioware has to pay to host and transmit their services to us, the players.

 

That's nowhere near "free to Bioware". Bandwidth costs, particularly for businesses, can be RIDICULOUS. Also, while it's true freeps and preems don't get in-game service like the subs do, Bioware still employs people to maintain the game for all its players to play. Freeps and preems share in that cost because they play here too.

 

Nothing's ever "free" except advice. -bp

[LordArtemis]

And my responses to yours.

 

1) Perfectly fine. Preferred gets to mail stuff as they should for financially supporting the game at some point in time. F2Ps should rightfully be shut out of the mail system except for the ability to retrieve things from GTN. They don't pay to maintain the game and are therefore a drain on resourcs.

 

To my knowledge preferred players do not get any perks when it comes to mail. They have the same restrictions that F2P players have, including the lack of the ability to mail between characters on their legacy. I could be wrong about this naturally, or perhaps this may have changed recently.

 

At any rate, I think that the judgement is a bit silly, since we are talking about encouraging F2P players to stay in the game long enough to become preferred and eventually subs, or at the very least spend ridiculous amounts of cash as preferred players like in other similar model games on the market. The drain on resources is the money wasted on the F2P system when it does not provide the growth the game needs IMO.

 

2) That's called "marketing".

 

I have to disagree, that's called spam IMO, and spam that can discourage folks from playing the game. It is silly, IMO, to indicate this kind of annoying prompt is some kind of sale device. If anything it is more likely to be something that turns someone away from the title.

 

3) And with good reason - features cost money to add and maintain. Preferred had their chat feature fixed; F2P needs no fixes (and frankly, that's an anti-spam measure, keeping them squelched until level 10. It SHOULD be level 20.)

 

Again, I am not aware that preferred has their own chat feature other than using general, which they have with restrictions, and its a bit odd for you to speak of anti spam measures as positive, then promote spam from the game itself.

 

Nah. The three tiers we have work rather well.

 

You have no information to my knowledge to base this judgement on other than perhaps your opinion, and therefore your point is no more or less valid than my own. I say three tiers have not worked well at all.

 

1) I can agree with that if we're talking an artifact-quality item much like Equipment Authorization or Unify Colors.

 

Ok, well, good. The idea of the suggestion is to improve the game, increase profit and sub numbers, not give away the game to freeloaders as some have suggested. Although, I think the prices for the items you mentioned are fine, but a legacy mail unlock should be much more expensive. I would place cost as the barrier to freeloaders instead of the lack of existence.

 

2) Nah. Then it's not as effective a marketing tool. Understand that it's structured specifically to annoy you into buying something. That's why it's called a "nag".

 

It has exactly the opposite effect IMO. Your post is well thought IMO, but IMO this contention is absolutely ridiculous.

 

3) Absolutely not. I can tell you from personal experience that setting communication limitations is EXTREMELY effective in converting freeps and preems to subscriber status. Wanna talk? Gotta pay. Free speech ain't free.

Fair enough, but I can tell you from personal experience that it has had the opposite effect and a few companies have even recognized that and reversed the prior decision to keep them in the dark. So perhaps we have two different experiences in the market.

 

Also your "wanna talk" comment is more about entitlement IMO and less about game growth and vitality. This isn't politics, a religion or a life lesson. This is a vehicle of profit, fair doesn't even enter the equation. Any contention to the contrary is ludicrous IMO.

 

System seems to be fine the way it is. Consider a subscription if you don't like the restrictions. -bp

 

Or they can do like I say they probably have been doing and ignore the game to keep current subs happy while the game continues to suffer. This attitude is silly IMO and promotes an unhealthy environment for increasing game profits to appease a small group of elitists IMO.

 

In the VAST MAJORITY of free to play games on the market F2P players spend the lion's share of cash on the game compared to subs, in some games to the tune of 80/20 percent (average is not as stark, sitting around 60/40) where this game has subs paying the most.

 

I say that is indicative of the toxic state of the F2P system here. You turn F2P players off and they do not open their wallets...unless of course players here believe that they are unique among the market...which I think is complete folly.

 

I would also note that the same kind of silly comments were posed when the F2P first came out, and many changes were made despite community protestations. That was a wise move IMO, and more needs to be done.

 

And it seems that this idea is not something that Bioware completely opposes either.

Edited May 21, 2014 by LordArtemis

[PlasmaJohn]

To my knowledge preferred players do not get any perks when it comes to mail. They have the same restrictions that F2P players have, including the lack of the ability to mail between characters on their legacy. I could be wrong about this naturally, or perhaps this may have changed recently.

Preferred can send mail but only get one attachment. I forget if they can send credits but I do remember somebody mentioning that COD works (The sender flags the message COD with an amount that if accepted debits the receiver's balance).

[Sidenti]

We all know the drill!

 

And my responses to yours.

 

 

 

To my knowledge preferred players do not get any perks when it comes to mail. They have the same restrictions that F2P players have, including the lack of the ability to mail between characters on their legacy. I could be wrong about this naturally, or perhaps this may have changed recently.I know Preferred can send stuff to other players, anyway. But I have no qualms about denying Preferred that ability without purchasing an unlock first if they can't do that already.

 

At any rate, I think that the judgement is a bit silly, since we are talking about encouraging F2P players to stay in the game long enough to become preferred and eventually subs, or at the very least spend ridiculous amounts of cash as preferred players like in other similar model games on the market. The drain on resources is the money wasted on the F2P system when it does not provide the growth the game needs IMO.I have found that, typically, the only encouragement one needs to subscribe here is having the free cash. But that's anecdotal.

 

 

 

I have to disagree, that's called spam IMO, and spam that can discourage folks from playing the game. It is silly, IMO, to indicate this kind of annoying prompt is some kind of sale device. If anything it is more likely to be something that turns someone away from the title.Most, if not all, marketing can also be called spam. It is what it is. Annoying the customer with nag messages is pretty damned effective.

 

 

 

Again, I am not aware that preferred has their own chat feature other than using general, which they have with restrictions, and its a bit odd for you to speak of anti spam measures as positive, then promote spam from the game itself. What the game advertises for sale is legitimate. What the gold farmers offer for sale is not. That's a KEY difference.

 

 

 

You have no information to my knowledge to base this judgement on other than perhaps your opinion, and therefore your point is no more or less valid than my own. I say three tiers have not worked well at all.And my wife says I'm going to hell for eating hamburger. Only time will tell, but so far - and I use their own investor data as supporting evidence here - they seem to know what they're doing to pull in the green necessary to keep the doors open.

 

 

 

Ok, well, good. The idea of the suggestion is to improve the game, increase profit and sub numbers, not give away the game to freeloaders as some have suggested. Although, I think the prices for the items you mentioned are fine, but a legacy mail unlock should be much more expensive. I would place cost as the barrier to freeloaders instead of the lack of existence.Eh. Works for me. Makes a subscription that much more attractive, and subscriber numbers are a much bigger driver for long-term MMO investment than microtrans profits.

 

 

 

It has exactly the opposite effect IMO. Your post is well thought IMO, but IMO this contention is absolutely ridiculous.I don't know which contention that was. The reply doesn't show the quote. I'll figure it out in a bit and come back. (EDIT: Oh. I get it. When I say "personal experience", I mean the chat limitations are the SPECIFIC reason I subscribed. In case you haven't noticed, I can be a bit chatty. I ain't the only one.

 

 

Fair enough, but I can tell you from personal experience that it has had the opposite effect and a few companies have even recognized that and reversed the prior decision to keep them in the dark. So perhaps we have two different experiences in the market.Anecdotal experience is something that has to be properly qualified. When two experiences differ, compare it to the numbers.

 

Also your "wanna talk" comment is more about entitlement IMO and less about game growth and vitality. This isn't politics, a religion or a life lesson. This is a vehicle of profit, fair doesn't even enter the equation. Any contention to the contrary is ludicrous IMO.Okay. Again, half the conversation so I'll come back.

 

 

 

Or they can do like I say they probably have been doing and ignore the game to keep current subs happy while the game continues to suffer. This attitude is silly IMO and promotes an unhealthy environment for increasing game profits to appease a small group of elitists IMO.What, precisely, about the game do you find is "suffering"? The lack of access to people that don't spend money? Hell, they should consider themselves fortunate to even be able to play.

 

In the VAST MAJORITY of free to play games on the market F2P players spend the lion's share of cash on the game compared to subs, in some games to the tune of 80/20 percent (average is not as stark, sitting around 60/40) where this game has subs paying the most.Here, the F2Per (or "freep") is a TRUE leech. A singular purchase irrevocably upconverts freeps to Preferred ("preems"). So, here? Freeps spend EXACTLY 0%!

 

I say that is indicative of the toxic state of the F2P system here. You turn F2P players off and they do not open their wallets...unless of course players here believe that they are unique among the market...which I think is complete folly.Again, the freep in SWTOR is a true leech. They can stay or go as far as I'm concerned. I'm more interested in people who want to financially support the game I am financially supporting.

 

I would also note that the same kind of silly comments were posed when the F2P first came out, and many changes were made despite community protestations. That was a wise move IMO, and more needs to be done.Your opinion. Mine varies.

 

And it seems that this idea is not something that Bioware completely opposes either.So long as the doors stay open, I can't be paid to care any less. -bp

Edited May 21, 2014 by Sidenti

[anesvik]

You do know you can unlock that without paying a dime of real money right?

 

Yes, This thread is about what we think should CHANGE. The fact that you caused another thread to derail does not mean I cant stay on topic.

Non-subs AND subs get titles. We all know this. We also know that subs can get special titles that non subs can not. I fell that if I could change one thing, it would be to allow non subs the ability to use and display titles the earned.

[LordArtemis]

Preferred can send mail but only get one attachment. I forget if they can send credits but I do remember somebody mentioning that COD works (The sender flags the message COD with an amount that if accepted debits the receiver's balance).

 

Ah, yes, I am aware of that ability. Thank you for the heads up though.

[LordArtemis]

We all know the drill!

 

Hehe. We sure do. I appreciate the discussion despite the fact that we do not agree on most points. You are certainly entitled to your views and you also could be completely correct naturally.

 

I know Preferred can send stuff to other players, anyway. But I have no qualms about denying Preferred that ability without purchasing an unlock first if they can't do that already.

 

Fair enough. I certainly would not like to see something like legacy mail given away.

 

I have found that, typically, the only encouragement one needs to subscribe here is having the free cash. But that's anecdotal.

 

Ok, again, fair enough.

 

Most, if not all, marketing can also be called spam. It is what it is. Annoying the customer with nag messages is pretty damned effective.

 

Not in this respect IMO. It acts more like repellant.

 

What the game advertises for sale is legitimate. What the gold farmers offer for sale is not. That's a KEY difference.

 

Actually the key difference is that not every free player talking on a chat box among themselves would likely be selling gold to other free players....but the game is DEFINITELY selling itself. You equate a chat system that is shared by free players as opportunity to sell gold, I say that is ludicrous....unless you think they could sell it to free players with no ability to receive it.

 

Just my slant.

 

And my wife says I'm going to hell for eating hamburger. Only time will tell, but so far - and I use their own investor data as supporting evidence here - they seem to know what they're doing to pull in the green necessary to keep the doors open.

 

I want to do more than keep the doors open. But fair enough.

 

Eh. Works for me. Makes a subscription that much more attractive, and subscriber numbers are a much bigger driver for long-term MMO investment than microtrans profits.

 

IMO they lack the ability to understand how to do so it seems. GS stands in evidence of this. I am disappointing with it's participation levels, overall appeal to the current playerbase and performance, strictly my view. Time will tell with strongholds, which could represent what GS should have represented to increase appeal of this title, but I am skeptical at this point.

 

But yes, I agree that a more appealing product could have the same effect with the current restrictions in place, making any further changes unnecessary.

 

I would like to point out, however, that some studies have demonstrated that a F2P and/or hybrid model is far more profitable than a sub model. AND it generally has positive revenue growth that supports active development.

 

A few studies have concluded that any mass market game that spends more than 6 figures on development and operating costs can not be profitable unless it can garner 2 million or more subscriptions at 15 dollars a month or cut costs dramatically in the first 6 months on the market.

 

This game seems to have suffered that fate. It should have launched as F2P from the beginning IMO.

 

The reply doesn't show the quote. I'll figure it out in a bit and come back. (EDIT: Oh. I get it. When I say "personal experience", I mean the chat limitations are the SPECIFIC reason I subscribed. In case you haven't noticed, I can be a bit chatty. I ain't the only one.

 

Sorry about that, I can be more clear in my responses so you can properly respond in the future. I can't argue with your own personal reasons that you subscribed, and that is as good a reason as any, certainly.

 

Anecdotal experience is something that has to be properly qualified. When two experiences differ, compare it to the numbers.

 

I am doing exactly that, but to be fair I have to disclose that many of the sources quoted in the past to support the idea that certain restrictions hurt implementation and appeal came from studies that one could say were biased toward the F2P model as profit vehicles in todays modern market....so there is that. I present an opinion that is obviously very pro F2P model to be clear...I do not see F2P players as a strain, I see them as a boon.

 

Both for this game and for it's future. The game was not good enough, it seems, at least under the prior dev team to garner enough interest from those that would pay each month for a sub, as the released numbers indicate.

 

Okay. Again, half the conversation so I'll come back.

 

Again, I apologize for that...I will find a way to provide the full quote to make it easier for you to properly respond.

 

What, precisely, about the game do you find is "suffering"? The lack of access to people that don't spend money? Hell, they should consider themselves fortunate to even be able to play.

 

The game is fortunate to have players. The game is fortunate to get paid money. Players are not fortunate to play. To suggest otherwise is silly IMO. I expect Bioware feels the same way considering this is a business, not a charity.

 

Here, the F2Per (or "freep") is a TRUE leech. A singular purchase irrevocably upconverts freeps to Preferred ("preems"). So, here? Freeps spend EXACTLY 0%!

 

...which is why we have to get them spending money instead of walking away IMO. I use F2P to speak of the non-sub and the business model...I do not mean the small group of players that never pay anything.

 

Again, the freep in SWTOR is a true leech. They can stay or go as far as I'm concerned. I'm more interested in people who want to financially support the game I am financially supporting.

 

So you do not consider Preferred players leeches then. Perhaps you misunderstood me.

 

Your opinion. Mine varies.

 

Fair enough, abet obvious

 

So long as the doors stay open, I can't be paid to care any less. -bp

 

Ok. I do and will continue to care. I think this game deserves better personally.

Edited May 21, 2014 by LordArtemis

[CecilPaladin]

The ONLY thing I wish they changed was to either remove the credit limit, or raise it up to a million or something. It's such a pain in the butt to work around this arbitrary 350k credit limit. I get that there's escrow items, but if you don't stock up on them before your sub ends you are SOL.

 

I'm fine with everything else honestly. A distant 2nd is the lower exp gain if you are preferred or f2p. There just aren't enough quests to actually get you to 55 with the penalty. But if I had one wish, it would be to change the credit limit.

[OddballEasyEight]

Yes, This thread is about what we think should CHANGE. The fact that you caused another thread to derail does not mean I cant stay on topic.

Non-subs AND subs get titles. We all know this. We also know that subs can get special titles that non subs can not. I fell that if I could change one thing, it would be to allow non subs the ability to use and display titles the earned.

 

And they can.

By buying (or even being gifted by a friend) the unlock with in-game credits off the GTN.

It's not locked for them. It's just not available from start.

 

And don't accuse me of derailing a thread just because I corrected your statement. This thread isn't JUST about what we think should change, it's also about IF we think it is prohibitive. And I don't think the titles are prohibitive. They can easily buy them off the GTN for in-game cash and they don't have to spend a dime doing it.

I know I didn't when I went preferred for a few months.

Edited May 21, 2014 by OddballEasyEight

[Sidenti]

Stupid forum boards. Lord, gonna reply paragraph by paragraph right here for ya, buddy. (Hey, maybe Bioware should change their forum platform to something a little more 21st century while we're at it...)

 

* I like a GOOD debate. This is a good one.

 

* Agreement achieved! No further discussion on Preferred mail needed, then, I'd say. (Unless something else comes up. I love agreements.)

 

* Again, my experience on whether or not people subscribe based solely on cash or lack thereof is anecdotal. But you're kind to call it "fair". (Frankly, I don't even know why I tried to use an anecdote.)

 

* In RE: nagvertising - It works. Do I agree with it? No. I hate most forms of advertising. To me, the product should stand on its own. Can it be done better or more responsibly? Probably. But would it be as effective as the drug dealer approach? (Give 'em a taste for free then charge, is how that works.) Probably not. What matters to EA right now is recouping its investment by any means necessary. They spent a LOT on this. Bioware did too.

 

* While not EVERY freep will engage in gold spamming, the fact remains that opening the door to them earlier and taking restrictions off of their chat will markedly increase such behavior. I wish it weren't the case, but we both know this to be a true and extremely likely scenario. Imagine how THAT would affect quality-of-play. It's just not worth it to make chat restriction-free for non-payers. At LEAST let's make these people buy something to spam.

 

* If you want to do more than keep the doors open on your favorite game, more power to you. I've been there before. But it's extremely thankless and non-profitable work. Please keep that in mind. (I'm sure you will, but what kinda guy would I be if I didn't say something about this facet?)

 

* If you want to show me some figures supporting your claim in regard to profit models, I'm willing to read it.

 

* You're not responsible for the fault of the forum software to populate multiquotes, but I appreciate your apologizing on their behalf (which is how I took it as, naturally, you are not to blame here).

 

* Now, I know we're meaning F2P in two different contexts, so let me be clear - those that DO NOT PAY ANYTHING AT ALL are the drains. They have no intention of supporting the game. They only intend to feed off of it. I can't respect that, but that's a personal issue.

 

* Two apologies and it wasn't even your fault! You're a good egg.

 

* Now, on this we may not agree. I strongly believe that those who do not pay anything to play here ARE fortunate to experience even the small taste they get. Again, this may be related to differing personal views.

 

* It's not as small a group as one might think, but none of us have hard numbers to tell us. (A world without secrets would be an amazing, informative world indeed!)

 

* Anyone who pays anything, even if it's just $5 over the span of a decade, supports the game. I have no qualms with anyone who supports the game. (I wouldn't even really have any qualms about the continued existence of freeps so long as there's no insistence that they be given anything more than what they're handed anyway.)

 

And finally:

 

* Again: Be careful how much you care about a game. Or anything that isn't strictly YOUR project. Investing oneself into another's project is noble, but often ends with a lot of grief for the knight who charges in. -bp

[LordArtemis]

Stupid forum boards. Lord, gonna reply paragraph by paragraph right here for ya, buddy. (Hey, maybe Bioware should change their forum platform to something a little more 21st century while we're at it...)

 

Does make it difficult to have a good point to point with someone. You have to edit your response yourself.

 

* I like a GOOD debate. This is a good one.

 

I agree, and you certainly raise good counter points, all the better.

 

* Agreement achieved! No further discussion on Preferred mail needed, then, I'd say. (Unless something else comes up. I love agreements.)

 

Hehe. It is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility for us to see eye to eye.

 

* Again, my experience on whether or not people subscribe based solely on cash or lack thereof is anecdotal. But you're kind to call it "fair". (Frankly, I don't even know why I tried to use an anecdote.)

 

I call it fair because it is....most of our opinions, in mine, are based on personal experiences, and that really cant be argued....I really cant say YOU didnt have that experience. You are a better source of that information than I would be naturally, and that opinion therefore has just as much weight as any other IMO.

 

* In RE: nagvertising - It works. Do I agree with it? No. I hate most forms of advertising. To me, the product should stand on its own. Can it be done better or more responsibly? Probably. But would it be as effective as the drug dealer approach? (Give 'em a taste for free then charge, is how that works.) Probably not. What matters to EA right now is recouping its investment by any means necessary. They spent a LOT on this. Bioware did too.

 

I don't suggest the removal of it entirely as the only option....perhaps a reduction. Every single addition to the pool is dinged...that means every mob you kill, every reward, EVERYTHING...and that, to me, is a bit much, and it seems to be a popular complaint across the net.

 

* While not EVERY freep will engage in gold spamming, the fact remains that opening the door to them earlier and taking restrictions off of their chat will markedly increase such behavior. I wish it weren't the case, but we both know this to be a true and extremely likely scenario. Imagine how THAT would affect quality-of-play. It's just not worth it to make chat restriction-free for non-payers. At LEAST let's make these people buy something to spam.

 

You might misunderstand my intent here. I do not intend to give free and preferred players the ability to openly chat on general...they already have restrictions in place, and frankly I would not have given them that much.

 

I am suggesting that they should have their own chat window they can use for themselves....in other words a chat that is only for free players and preferred. They can't sell gold to each other since they can't send gold....so I believe this would not effect subs at all.

 

* If you want to do more than keep the doors open on your favorite game, more power to you. I've been there before. But it's extremely thankless and non-profitable work. Please keep that in mind. (I'm sure you will, but what kinda guy would I be if I didn't say something about this facet?)

 

Fair enough. My post history demonstrates my futile efforts in this respect quite clearly

 

* If you want to show me some figures supporting your claim in regard to profit models, I'm willing to read it.

 

I could do that. As I have indicated in the past, any internal studies we have paid for are heavilly redacted, however I can also post external studies and the sites that commercially provide them.

 

I just have to gather the information again or find my prior posts. I do not have the specifics in hand at this time.

 

* You're not responsible for the fault of the forum software to populate multiquotes, but I appreciate your apologizing on their behalf (which is how I took it as, naturally, you are not to blame here).

 

Hey, yea, I forgot how nice multiquotes were for fostering a discussion.

 

* Now, I know we're meaning F2P in two different contexts, so let me be clear - those that DO NOT PAY ANYTHING AT ALL are the drains. They have no intention of supporting the game. They only intend to feed off of it. I can't respect that, but that's a personal issue.

 

Fair enough...I would pose only that they contribute warm bodies, but I have not read anything on folks that pay nothing...so I would have to say the contributions they make are perhaps speculative at best. The studies I have read are on folks that do not sub but pay for items and unlocks from a market.

 

* Two apologies and it wasn't even your fault! You're a good egg.

 

Thanks.

 

* Now, on this we may not agree. I strongly believe that those who do not pay anything to play here ARE fortunate to experience even the small taste they get. Again, this may be related to differing personal views.

 

Well, actually we do agree. Playing completely for free is a privilege, certainly. I contend that I am dealing with, or pointing to those that pay, even if it is just with purchases, and those folks are the ones I am making the suggestions for.

 

* It's not as small a group as one might think, but none of us have hard numbers to tell us. (A world without secrets would be an amazing, informative world indeed!)

 

Bioware has released some information on free players, subs and the amount of money spent by who....but I do not have the exact quotes. I will look for them. I can also post some quotes from other games if needed. WoT (arguably the largest game on the market) has posted quite a bit in this respect. WoT IS the F2P business model used most often in studies I have found.

 

* Anyone who pays anything, even if it's just $5 over the span of a decade, supports the game. I have no qualms with anyone who supports the game. (I wouldn't even really have any qualms about the continued existence of freeps so long as there's no insistence that they be given anything more than what they're handed anyway.)

 

So it seems we may have more of a meeting of the minds than I first expected.

 

And finally:

 

* Again: Be careful how much you care about a game. Or anything that isn't strictly YOUR project. Investing oneself into another's project is noble, but often ends with a lot of grief for the knight who charges in. -bp

 

Well, all things end. What we do while those things exist define us IMO. This is me. But I have no illusions as to what will happen in the future...eventually this game, like all others, will close its doors.

[Alec_Fortescue]

I think credit restriction has to go for preferred accounts that have a history of either a long sub or large CM purchases.

[Bdachel]

F2p shouldn't be able to send any messages in chat just so credit spammers have to spend money every time they get banned.

 

Nobody really needs to chat to learn how to play the game there are guides out there for free just use google.

 

I'm just posting this because the spammers tick me off.

[LordArtemis]

F2p shouldn't be able to send any messages in chat just so credit spammers have to spend money every time they get banned.

 

Nobody really needs to chat to learn how to play the game there are guides out there for free just use google.

 

I'm just posting this because the spammers tick me off.

 

My suggestion is that they have their own chat box. I did not suggest they have unrestricted general chat access.

[ScarletBlaze]

I am of the opinion that there are three distinct weaknesses in the current F2P/Preferred system that do not lend themselves to promote growth for this title. They are, as follows....

 

1) Lack of ability to more than one item and money between legacy characters on the same account.

2) Constant spam to indicate that you have reached credit cap.

3) Lack of ability for F2P and Preferred players to openly communicate among themselves in game (lack of a chat channel for F2P)

 

I also feel that a third tier is missing from the mix, a "Veteran" tier if you will, one that removes most (but not all) of the remaining restrictions for preferred players if they have subscribed to the game for at least 180 days in the lifetime of the account.

 

These are the only remaining weaknesses of the current model IMO. Below are my suggestions for each.

1) Allow folks to purchase an unlock that will open up legacy mail.

2) Either remove the sound effect from the coin limit spam, or space it out over, say, every ten deposits.

3) Add a channel to the chat box that would exist for free and preferred players to openly chat among themselves. Subscribers would naturally be able to participate, or could simply ignore it.

 

As far as the "Veteran" tier, I have a list of changes that I will post later after some editing.

 

I would like to hear some other opinions on this, even those that wish for more restrictions, not less. Thanks for reading.

 

I don't see anything on your list that sounds unreasonable even though I have always been a sub and plan to be one. it doesn't seem like your list is asking for things unreasonable.

 

I would add I think maybe they need to add a fourth tier to the module maybe one that is actually for the subscribers that had been a subscriber not just the ones that brought $5.00 (?) in cartel coins. There should be something different for old subscribers .

 

My opinion .

[LordArtemis]

I don't see anything on your list that sounds unreasonable even though I have always been a sub and plan to be one. it doesn't seem like your list is asking for things unreasonable.

 

I would add I think maybe they need to add a fourth tier to the module maybe one that is actually for the subscribers that had been a subscriber not just the ones that brought $5.00 (?) in cartel coins. There should be something different for old subscribers .

 

My opinion .

 

I have often been an advocate of a regular subscriber reward system, similar to the one that SWG had. The coins stipend is a good idea, but sub rewards would be the sauce I think to keep most folks subbed.

[ScarletBlaze]

I have often been an advocate of a regular subscriber reward system, similar to the one that SWG had. The coins stipend is a good idea, but sub rewards would be the sauce I think to keep most folks subbed.

 

I loved my vet rewards on SWG.

[LordArtemis]

I loved my vet rewards on SWG.

 

So did I...and it often got me to resub. Loved to get that loot when I logged in.

 

They are doing something like that with the "subscribed by X you get this" setup they run from time to time, but I think it needs more structure.

[BarrinMarshall]

Bioware already promised to lift the restriction on Warzone games played per week for preferred and F2P like 8-9 months ago. They should make good on this.... more people being able to que and play is just what the PVP side of this game needs and Bioware also already promised to do so. As far as revenue is concerned, the carrot is still always out there to be taken by the free players to sub... maybe keep ranked matches still restricted? That way F2P still have to buy FP,OPS, Ranked passes every week supplied by the guys who buy CC's and use them to buy them off of the CM. The revenue stream continues just with a middle man then.

[Styxx]

But when the game went F2P you could play to levelcap without paying a dime.

The fact that you cannot enjoy the benefits of the expansion without subscribing OR paying for the expansion does not stop the base game from being F2P

 

The base game is not F2P and never was - not in the sense that it is 100% free. It offers ONLY restricted access for free - nowhere it is said that Free is the new model. No game in the world is completely free and this game is no exception.

 

Be happy - you or anyone that plays or wants to play without spending money - that you can play as it is. Lacking any proof they spent ANY money, or money up to at least 15 bucks per month, freeloaders will never be more than "beggars can`t be choosers".

[Volthorne]

No game in the world is completely free and this game is no exception.

 

League of Legends, DotA2, AirMech, Spiral Knights (SK even allows trading of hard currency for soft currency between players), TF2, RIFT, Hearthstone, Heroes of the Storm, Path of Exile. All games where you can literally get EVERYTHING that isn't superficial or superfluous (cosmetics, skins, server changes, etc. Exception is TF2, where there is nothing you can't get for free eventually) for free. Not to mention those are just the ones I can name off the top of my head, there's probably a lot more out there.

Edited May 22, 2014 by Volthorne