Life some restrictions for F2P?

[Highsis]

I'm a subscriber. I will always be.

 

However, MMO's future prospect is reflected in the number of players enjoying the game regardless of their subscription status. Not many of you are going to play this game forever. A game needs constant inflow of new players, some of which will subscribe. Otherwise, the game will stagnate and die eventually.

 

Compared to other recent games such as Tera, SWTOR both have very harsh restrictions on F2P model and relatively low number of of F2P/preferred players. I wish the game had opened up more so to allow inflow of new F2P players on the game. It doesn't damage us subscribers in any way, if anything it makes game world more vibrant with lives. Subscription status should give convinient bonuses on top of regular gameplay, rather than restricting F2P from properly enjoying a game; it shows in the dininishing number of new players of SWTOR.

[Rankyn]

I fail to see how being able to play the entire base game for absolutely free is too restrictive.

 

If someone enjoys the game enough that they want to do anything more than dabble in it then they should be willing to subscribe to it.

Failing that, most things can be unlocked with in-game currency.

 

 

F2P is too restrictive = First World Problem.

[Highsis]

I fail to see how being able to play the entire base game for absolutely free is too restrictive.

 

If someone enjoys the game enough that they want to do anything more than dabble in it then they should be willing to subscribe to it.

Failing that, most things can be unlocked with in-game currency.

 

 

F2P is too restrictive = First World Problem.

 

Becuase it is all relative and SWTOR F2P is severely restrictive compared to this generations F2P model.

[LyraineAlei]

Becuase it is all relative and SWTOR F2P is severely restrictive compared to this generations F2P model.

 

This games F2P model is that F2Ps get Zabrak/Human/Cyborgs, and the base game 1-50, which covers the class story. From my reading, F2P get the original game, Prefs get some of the bonus stuff, and when F2P came into play, they needed an incentive to get people to subscribe, so the Sub's get everything short of what currently needs a preorder, and soon just an order after Dec/2/2014, followed likely by a few months later that sub's get everything to 60 as well.

 

System works well IMO, it got me to subscribe. And other MMOs I have played only allowed pretty much the same things as SWTOR.

 

F2Ps get the original game for free. They want more? Then pay some real cash for something, cartel counts or a subscription*.

 

*Don't give me the "What if they don't have a credit card?" line, because many stores (Walmart, Target, others in the US) and many stores outside of the US, sell 60 day time cards for the price of two month's subscription. No credit card required.

[Darth_Wicked]

F2P, as the term implies, are freeloaders.

 

They should consider themselves fortunate, considering what LyraineAlei stated above already.

 

You can't possibly expect to get the full cake for free.

Edited October 24, 2014 by Darth_Wicked

[LordArtemis]

If it encouraged the recruitment and retention of new players then it would be a good move, despite how the current "its a first world problem" folks might stand against it. I'm failing to understand why this argument is made constantly....because after all, it is important to sacrifice the health of the game to make sure that we do not give away too much for free.

 

IMO its attitudes like that that were killing the games prospects in the first place.

 

What we do know is the game was likely heading straight for a cliff under the sub only model and the original development team, and it is now healthy under the new F2P model and the new dev team.

 

Future performance is always speculative, as well as what may be causing current problems.

[CloudzDeven]

I like to compare any "f2p" model to TERAs. All new content is free, no p2w and the stuff u can buy with real money is cosmetic. You never feel like you have a tangible disadvantage to people who sub. All their benefits are QoL stuff like increased xp and money gain. Having said that, don't expect swtor to improve their f2p system. Not unless the market seriously shifts to F2P.

 

On the other hand while I understand not giving f2p/pref the expansions some of the limitations (like flashpoints, operations and warzones) are a little much.

 

What we do know is the game was likely heading straight for a cliff under the sub only model and the original development team, and it is now healthy under the new F2P model and the new dev team.

I wasn't here at launch, but from my understanding is that the team isn't new and that they actually got rid of members. Who's new to the team since the switch to F2P?

Edited October 24, 2014 by CloudzDeven

[Applejacxs]

I do wonder if there going to raise the lvl cap for f2p also would kinda suck for them to still be at 50 when most of everyone would be at 60

[CloudzDeven]

I do wonder if there going to raise the lvl cap for f2p also would kinda suck for them to still be at 50 when most of everyone would be at 60

 

The level disparity is going to become a lot more obvious with the new level cap. That's besides the fact that F2Ps have had no new content (besides Strongholds) to really play with for a long time. It'll basically be a glorified trial at 3.0.

[Highsis]

I want more players, for both vibrant in game world and the future of SWTOR for MMO eventually dies without inflow of new players. I feel as though the game is not getting any significant number of new players, but only those who return to check the new expansion/updates. That's just not a good sign for the game.

 

As a subscriber, I don't really care who deserves a cake who doesn't. I just wish there were more players on sometimes barren world I play in.

[Gomla]

If you think this is bad you should have seen it on the PTR before it launched.

 

We were subscribers and we begged BioWare to change a lot because it was that bad. If they had kept it as it was then, it wouldn't be going now.

 

I still chuckle at 1 action bar.

[LeJarC]

I do wonder if there going to raise the lvl cap for f2p also would kinda suck for them to still be at 50 when most of everyone would be at 60

They do as long as they buy the expansion. You only need to be a sub if you want to get the 12x XP boost when pre-ordering. You do not need to be one to pre-order or buy the expansion Edited October 25, 2014 by LeJarC

[LordArtemis]

There is some talk that LoLs conversion rate is only 3 percent or so, compared to WoTs 25 to 30 percent. So there is some basis to the argument that perhaps you can give away too much.

 

In the case of traditional MMOs though, IMO, less is not more, and drawing in casuals is the key. IMO Casuals want story, appearance, minigames and RP. They love leveling, have little interest in end game or PVP.

 

In this respect GSF was a complete failure IMO, and Strongholds has some teeth as a QoL booster for casuals and some passing interest as a housing model, but it isn't a great one.

 

We need some of those MOBA players, which is precisely why I felt GSF was so vital to the future of the game, and why I feel it was a fumble of epic proportions. We didn't need a sliver of BF2, we needed BF2 IMO.

 

At any rate, they can pull in casuals by other means if they loosen the restrictions a bit. Right now there are still quite a few remaining that are a bit draconian IMO.

[hooty]

What is already provided for free is plenty for a new player to decide whether they want to pay or not. Those who play all the free content and don't like the game enough to pay something for it are unlikely to ever become paying customers. They have already decided it's not worth it for them to pay. Giving them more stuff for free is not going to turn them into paying customers. And if the end result is not more paying customers, then there is no reason to give more away for free.

[LordArtemis]

What is already provided for free is plenty for a new player to decide whether they want to pay or not. Those who play all the free content and don't like the game enough to pay something for it are unlikely to ever become paying customers. They have already decided it's not worth it for them to pay. Giving them more stuff for free is not going to turn them into paying customers. And if the end result is not more paying customers, then there is no reason to give more away for free.

 

I disagree with almost this entire statement. I would like to reply to each point made.

 

What is already provided for free is plenty for a new player to decide whether they want to pay or not.

 

Naturally this is based on our own opinions, so there is no need to argue that point. I am obviously of the opinion that this is not the case. There are too many restrictions that can sour a new gamer unfairly against the game, which is evident in almost every forum outside of this one, at least in so far as some players that tried the game and have complaints based on those very restrictions.

 

Those who play all the free content and don't like the game enough to pay something for it are unlikely to ever become paying customers. They have already decided it's not worth it for them to pay.

 

This can be seen as a logical statement. So this statement is true IMO. However, we are not talking about those kind of players, which every free model has. We are talking about the 5 to 30 percent (speculative) that might pay money if they were so enticed.

 

Because they do pay money in other games according to industry studies...other games that have less draconian restrictions. That is the money we should be trying to court IMO.

 

Giving them more stuff for free is not going to turn them into paying customers.

 

This is absolutely incorrect. All of the evidence that exists in the market proves otherwise, without a shadow of a doubt. So this, IMO, is a ridiculous and uninformed contention.

 

And if the end result is not more paying customers, then there is no reason to give more away for free.

 

Again, this statement is accurate IMO...to a part. It can also be said that if the freeps in this game do not pay to reach a percentage similar to the market trend perhaps we should OFFER what other games in the industry offer in their F2P model. So in essence, we would offer more for free, IF that would have an effect.

 

The question is this really...would the following restrictions....

Lack of ability to post in Customer Service or a F2P forum, or receive customer service

Lack of ability to mail coins to their own characters

Lack of ability to craft a reasonable amount of items in que

Travel and movement restrictions

 

...translate into subscriptions? I think the answer is likely not. The other restrictions in place, IMO, are not only non punitive, they DO encourage subscriptions.

 

However, would the following....

 

Ability to earn CC in game other than achievements

Ability to remove mods from armor at no cost

Ability to purchase speeder 1 at level 1

Ability to earn monthly account awards for every month you are subscribed

Ability to be summoned by/summon group members on the same planet to a specific location

Lack of armor repair costs

Bonus to crit chance when crafting of 5/10/15 percent, depending on length of sub

Ability to que 1/3/5 extra crafted items in the crafting que, per companion, depending on length of sub

Ability to add 1/2/3 extra missions to crew mission que, depending on length of sub

Ability to use chat bubbles in groups

Ability to use a brand new appearance system

Access to special decorations (functioning, like other jukeboxes that play game music, gambling kiosks, etc), hooks that can be moved to almost anywhere before they are locked down, large floor hooks that allow open placement

 

....convince folks to sub? I believe they would.

 

We have to have more candy to offer subs, and remove a few of the more draconian restrictions, and I think we would have a winner in the market.

Edited October 25, 2014 by LordArtemis

[CloudzDeven]

All of the evidence that exists in the market proves otherwise, without a shadow of a doubt.

 

 

Ability to earn CC in game other than achievements

Ability to remove mods from armor at no cost

Ability to purchase speeder 1 at level 1

Ability to earn monthly account awards for every month you are subscribed

Ability to be summoned by/summon group members on the same planet to a specific location

Lack of armor repair costs

Bonus to crit chance when crafting of 5/10/15 percent, depending on length of sub

Ability to que 1/3/5 extra crafted items in the crafting que, per companion, depending on length of sub

Ability to add 1/2/3 extra missions to crew mission que, depending on length of sub

Ability to use chat bubbles in groups

Ability to use a brand new appearance system

Access to special decorations (functioning, like other jukeboxes that play game music, gambling kiosks, etc), hooks that can be moved to almost anywhere before they are locked down, large floor hooks that allow open placement

.

 

At risk of sounding like a broken record this is why I like TERA's model. A good pay model should entice people to sub because of the benefits subs have, not the downsides non-subs have. You don't take the wheels off one car to make the crappy car next to look better by comparison. I would like a link to one of your sources though. Seems like it would be an interesting read.

[LyraineAlei]

*winces* chat bubbles? Please. No.

 

I think getting some CS would help in keeping the F2Ps who would leave because some of the bugs are game breaking, for example the pesky Agent storyline Holoterminal problem where we sit and stare at Watcher Two with no dialogue. If CS were available, then the F2Ps could file a ticket, and then they can play again once the issue was resolved.

 

Might not translate into subscribers, but it would help retain the players for a while longer.

[Darth_Wicked]

*winces* chat bubbles? Please. No.

 

I think getting some CS would help in keeping the F2Ps who would leave because some of the bugs are game breaking, for example the pesky Agent storyline Holoterminal problem where we sit and stare at Watcher Two with no dialogue. If CS were available, then the F2Ps could file a ticket, and then they can play again once the issue was resolved.

 

Might not translate into subscribers, but it would help retain the players for a while longer.

 

CS should be only accessible to people who support the game.

 

F2P doesn't fit that criteria; People at CS already have their hands full with subscribers I think.

[JediRelentless]

What is already provided for free is plenty for a new player to decide whether they want to pay or not. Those who play all the free content and don't like the game enough to pay something for it are unlikely to ever become paying customers. They have already decided it's not worth it for them to pay. Giving them more stuff for free is not going to turn them into paying customers. And if the end result is not more paying customers, then there is no reason to give more away for free.

 

I agree.

[CloudzDeven]

CS should be only accessible to people who support the game.

 

F2P doesn't fit that criteria; People at CS already have their hands full with subscribers I think.

 

So what about preferred? There are other ways to support the game other than subbing thanks to the cartel market, but pref still aren't allowed to post if they haven't subbed before.

[XiamaraSimi]

What is already provided for free is plenty for a new player to decide whether they want to pay or not. Those who play all the free content and don't like the game enough to pay something for it are unlikely to ever become paying customers. They have already decided it's not worth it for them to pay. Giving them more stuff for free is not going to turn them into paying customers. And if the end result is not more paying customers, then there is no reason to give more away for free.

 

Agreed. People standing there complaining what they get for free isn't good enough always kills me.

 

Its like a homeless guy comlaining that the shelter that is giving him a free peanut butter sandwhich and juice won't also give him a beer as well.

[CloudzDeven]

Agreed. People standing there complaining what they get for free isn't good enough always kills me.

 

Its like a homeless guy comlaining that the shelter that is giving him a free peanut butter sandwhich and juice won't also give him a beer as well.

 

That would imply that was the only shelter in the area. SWTOR isn't the only MMO and because of that we can compare other F2P models and see if SWTOR's has room for improvement.

 

Using your example, if there was another shelter down the road that gave him a beer and everything else it wouldn't be unreasonable for the homeless guy to complain. I mean why can't that homeless shelter provide beer if the other one can?

[Lotharofxev]

Some misinformation in this thread.

 

1) When SWTOR switched to a F2P/Pref/Sub model, they also introduced the Cartel Market. Otherwise you are trying to tell me that they saved the game (financially) by letting people play for free.

 

2) If $15/month is too onerous, folks need to re-examine their life.

 

3) http://www.jonasmaxwell.com/pages/index.cfm?pg=234&cat=5

[Tsillah]

Compared to other recent games such as Tera, SWTOR both have very harsh restrictions on F2P model and relatively low number of of F2P/preferred players.

 

And where did you get this information? Oh, you made it up....I see.

 

 

I wish the game had opened up more so to allow inflow of new F2P players on the game.

 

It has and a lot of new players have come in. If you've been here a while, you should know that the game in 2012 almost fell flat on it's ***. It's sad that that happened but the F2P option brought in millions of accounts and with each new expansion small or big I see new players coming in on my server.

 

It doesn't damage us subscribers in any way, if anything it makes game world more vibrant with lives. Subscription status should give convinient bonuses on top of regular gameplay, rather than restricting F2P from properly enjoying a game; it shows in the dininishing number of new players of SWTOR.

 

That is not true. You personally may not feel that way but I do not want F2P limits lifted and I will tell you why. There are 2 main reasons.

 

1) Gold seller activity. Before F2P came it was virtually non existent. Since F2P the fleet and starter planets get constant gold seller advertisement. Limites on crafting, trading, sending money, credit caps etc are in place to curb gold seller activity. It limits their ability to move credits around. Once you go F2P you can't stop it completely so limiting is the next best thing.

 

2) Balance between what F2P gets and what paying a sub gets you. This is a rather more precarious balance than you might think. Giving F2P more for free will always make more people who have subs rethink whether they want to stay subbed. Say what you want, but it is my firm belief based on the people I've played with over the years that it's the subbed players who spend the most cash in the CM on top of their sub. Encouraging people to take a step back might hurt sales more than just the sub.

 

You seem to worry about the influx of new players. I don't get it, the starter planets, coruscant/dromund kaas are all full of people and most planets have multiple instances most of the day.

 

What I think the real problem is, is that we have had a long wait on new content this year. Player housing with Strongholds and 3.0 with new endgame will turn that around I think.

 

If anything, I hope BW learned this year that it's bad business to make people wait 20 months for new operations. On the other hand now that it's coming we can see that the game has a lot more going on with GSF, Strongholds and now new endgame content for gear progression.

 

So for me it's not the F2P model but the schedule of adding new content that's been the real culprit here.

[Oyranos]

Give f2p section x free... I tried to do the heroic 4 today, because 3 people needed for the last phase and 4 for the doors... But there is no people on secion x, subs dont play section x

 

give them a section in the forums for f2p, a thread to post their needs.

Also increase their credit gap, so we the subscribers can sell more stuff... 250000 is very limited. I would do 600.000.

 

as for those who complain about the credit gap versus gold sellers, plz guys think.... Gold sellers have subs..Or else they cant move the credits and they cant have credits. F2P is only for advertising, not gold store and transfer.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Oyranos