Darth_Wicked Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 You rip mods out of non-BOL gear, put it in BOL gear, move it to another character, rip it out of that gear, and put it in a non-BOL gear set on that character, on a weekly or daily or even hourly basis? I bet you *********** don't. Surely not daily but I do swap mods around fairly often, on a weekly basis. Again, I have 21 LV55's. Anything above purple 72's doesn't go to waste; Even purple 69's, depending of how much I fancy whatever companion. Also, except for two of those characters and companions whose gear is not visible, my companions and characters do NOT use Legacy gear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirazy Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Surely not daily but I do swap mods around fairly often, on a weekly basis. Again, I have 21 LV55's. Anything above purple 72's doesn't go to waste; Even purple 69's, depending of how much I fancy whatever companion. Also, except for two of those characters and companions whose gear is not visible, my companions and characters do NOT use Legacy gear. How much do you spend in a given week, do you think, on moving mods around? I move sets daily, several different sets back and forth between several different characters. If I were to do as I mentioned, pulling out of non-BOL gear on one character and putting it on non-BOL gear in a different character, just to maintain the look I want... I'd be spending close to 4m a day. For cosmetic reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reno_Tarshil Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 I might be, yes. "Pick an outfit and stick with it! Because the game is too expensive to do anything else!" Yeah that sums it up. That's your problem then, if you want to change your entire outfit repeatedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirazy Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 That's your problem then, if you want to change your entire outfit repeatedly. Duh? /5char Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaesha Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 You guys are STILL one this? Give it up already!!! Those for changing BOP/BOE to BOL you will not convince those against it to see it your way and visa versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khevar Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I personally enjoy their modular system, and prefer it to an appearance tab. But oh my god, work with us, please. If you don't mind the advice, I'd suggest starting a new thread the summarizes your points. Having followed most of these (and similar) threads, I gather that you'd be happy with the option to upgrade existing BoP shells to BoL through some method, or other options that end up having the same effect. Basically, it sounds like you're trying to improve appearance options. I believe this fact is lost in the many different things talked about in this thread, so you're getting into arguments about something other than what you're actually asking for. A new thread with a clear summary in the OP could vastly improve the discussion. Just a suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Wicked Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 How much do you spend in a given week, do you think, on moving mods around? I move sets daily, several different sets back and forth between several different characters. If I were to do as I mentioned, pulling out of non-BOL gear on one character and putting it on non-BOL gear in a different character, just to maintain the look I want... I'm not gonna ask. I'm really not. Regardless, I've been sitting between 45 and 47 million credits for the last few weeks or so. In other words, I guess I break even mostly. I'd be spending close to 4m a day. For cosmetic reasons. And that's a choice, a choice the game allows you to do. As such, you endure the consequences of such choice. Free will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reno_Tarshil Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 If you don't mind the advice, I'd suggest starting a new thread the summarizes your points. Having followed most of these (and similar) threads, I gather that you'd be happy with the option to upgrade existing BoP shells to BoL through some method, or other options that end up having the same effect. Basically, it sounds like you're trying to improve appearance options. I believe this fact is lost in the many different things talked about in this thread, so you're getting into arguments about something other than what you're actually asking for. A new thread with a clear summary in the OP could vastly improve the discussion. Just a suggestion. That was the whole purpose of this thread but it's gotten so off track..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirazy Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 IAnd that's a choice, a choice the game allows you to do. As such, you endure the consequences of such choice. Free will. Yeah and I choose not to do it, and instead post about it on the forums prodding Bioware to actually support genuine character customization and appearance options, within the framework they have thus far provided, consistent with the utility they have added through their Legacy system. Understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuriDogshin Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Because it's the most cumbersome way I can imagine them to implement such a system? You have never written software of any size, have you? Please consider the wisdom of making pronouncements about things you seem to know nothing about. If BW implemented the gear DB and bind-type-checking code in a straightforward way, it will be very easy to implement dye packs that convert gear to Bound-to-Legacy and require only a few isolated changes to a few functions, possibly just one function that determines the Bind status of a piece of gear, and an extra bit in the record used to represent dye packs in the database. Alternatively, you may only need to change the function used to insert or extract a dye from gear, as well as adding that bit. BtL-conversion dye packs also involve only minimal changes (if any) to the UI code, since users would manipulate such a dye pack just like any other dye pack. The only UI change might be the presence of "(BtL)" in the name of the dye and maybe an indication of its awesomeness in the icon for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Wicked Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) Yeah and I choose not to do it, and instead post about it on the forums prodding Bioware to actually support genuine character customization and appearance options, within the framework they have thus far provided, consistent with the utility they have added through their Legacy system. Understand? Understand. However, I disagree with your reasoning and I state as much. Once more... Free will.^^ You have an issue with the above, within the confines the game has set in place for you, which are fairly generous all things considered. I believe it was Ratajack who said it best... Give the mouse a cookie... Edited July 18, 2014 by Darth_Wicked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirazy Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) You have never written software of any size, have you? Please consider the wisdom of making pronouncements about things you seem to know nothing about. If BW implemented the gear DB and bind-type-checking code in a straightforward way, it will be very easy to implement dye packs that convert gear to Bound-to-Legacy and require only a few isolated changes to a few functions, possibly just one function that determines the Bind status of a piece of gear, and an extra bit in the record used to represent dye packs in the database. Alternatively, you may only need to change the function used to insert or extract a dye from gear, as well as adding that bit. BtL-conversion dye packs also involve only minimal changes (if any) to the UI code, since users would manipulate such a dye pack just like any other dye pack. The only UI change might be the presence of "(BtL)" in the name of the dye and maybe an indication of its awesomeness in the icon for it. Brah, just because something is super easy and quick to code doesn't mean that it's worth doing. The usability and UX is not to be ignored. If EVERY SINGLE DYE PACK that has been released and used thus far were retroactively adjusted to support such a change in their function? Sure. Go for it. Because then I don't have to re-buy every single dye pack I have already spent ****tons on. Edited July 18, 2014 by Kirazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reno_Tarshil Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 Yeah and I choose not to do it, and instead post about it on the forums prodding Bioware to actually support genuine character customization and appearance options, within the framework they have thus far provided, consistent with the utility they have added through their Legacy system. Understand? Please elaborate because first you said you spent 4 mil daily and now you're saying you're choosing not to do it? Which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirazy Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 (edited) Please elaborate because first you said you spent 4 mil daily and now you're saying you're choosing not to do it? Which is it? I said were I to. I choose not to. I maintain Legacy sets that are close to what I'd like to look like, but are not all there. Edited July 18, 2014 by Kirazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuriDogshin Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Brah, just because something is super easy and quick to code doesn't mean that it's worth doing. A tacit admission that your earlier comment about how hard Bound-to-Legacy-conversion dye packs would be to implement was just ignorant shenanigans. And also another show of your ignorance, since it should be obvious that the easier something is for BW to do, the more likely they are to do it, all else being equal. If EVERY SINGLE DYE PACK that has been released and used thus far were retroactively adjusted to support such a change in their function? Sure. Go for it. Because then I don't have to re-buy every single dye pack I have already spent ****tons on. Oh, you want it for free, do you? Why am I not surprised? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirazy Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 A tacit admission that your earlier comment about how hard Bound-to-Legacy-conversion dye packs would be to implement was just ignorant shenanigans. And also another show of your ignorance, since it should be obvious that the easier something is for BW to do, the more likely they are to do it, all else being equal. Wot? I said that? Oh, you want it for free, do you? Why am I not surprised? No, I'd be entirely happy with a purchasable token that is independent of any existing system that converts my gear to BOL. Just don't *********** make it a dye, that's stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinak Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 TL This was actually worth the read. I wish EA would stop striving for mediocrity. Show some ambition. Please. I'm begging you. I love this game, but the constant feeling that they are cutting as many corners as humanly possible in all aspects of the game is demoralizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TX_Angel Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 This was actually worth the read. I wish EA would stop striving for mediocrity. Show some ambition. Please. I'm begging you. I love this game, but the constant feeling that they are cutting as many corners as humanly possible in all aspects of the game is demoralizing. What you have to consider is that most of the dev budget is gone. Do you REALLY believe that GSF was expensive to make? I've seen free games on the iPad that are more involved than that. Does GSH look expensive? Really? Instanted housing with hooks? Every video I see just screams "cheap" to me. The last content that looks like it cost real development dollars was Oricon. Since then it has been all cheap and fast stuff. Time will tell with 3.0 if we get a real expansion, or if this game has been put on farm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterBlackJack Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 False equivalence Not even close. Yes they are. They are trying to make a themepark game into a sandbox, which this game was never intended to be. We saw it with GSF when they asked for it to be like JTL and now with housing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts