Life some restrictions for F2P?

[Tsillah]

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...

 

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.

 

Subs can be traced to a real bank account and sub accounts actually cost money. Gold sellers prefer ways where they can't be traced and don't have extra costs. They are smarter than you think in that sense. So if they have subs, it won't be too many and when they get banned they have to invest again. So if you lift the restrictions it will only make gold sellers more active and make it even easier for them to operate. It's a like a dam that holds back the flood of gold sellers and you want to open the dam....that's just crazy.

 

Fact is that gold seller messages were virtually non existent before F2P and now I cannot go to the fleet or a starter planet without seeing them advertise. Give them more freedom and it will only get worse. Advertisement is just part of the problem but it's the most visual part.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Tsillah

[Oyranos]

Gold seller messages existed before f2p...They send mails with 1 credit attached. NOW with the f2p, they simply advertise it in general, they dont send ingame mails.

 

I know that because I start playing almost a half year before MAKEB.

 

All in all swtor does not have a huge problem with gold selling. You have to see ESO and WOW lol its soooooo hard core, you will think that SWTOR gold sellers are soooo rare after you play these. They have so many, in a point that you cannot play and not because of the adverts, just because they are soooo many and you cant do anything! They drain all (bosses, mini bosses, resources, etc).

 

So yes, gold sellers play with subs.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Oyranos

[BrintoSFJ]

F2P gets unlimited single player version of the game : class story. everything else is unnecessarily restrictive. These restrictions don't serve any purpose for subscribers, f2p just get in the game, waste **** load of bandwidth playing the game like single player game and creating server lag for us and then leaving without contributing in improving our gameplay experience. at this point removing f2p options and making the game buy2play with optional subscription option is the best choice if eaware is so hellbent on making some money off suckers. if eaware is serious about f2p then they should at least remove quickbar, legacy name/title, game title, helmet, quest reward, FP and normal wz restrictions for f2p and increase the credits limit so that we can at least sell some cash shop items to them for a good amount of creds return.

[Gomla]

Subs can be traced to a real bank account and sub accounts actually cost money. Gold sellers prefer ways where they can't be traced and don't have extra costs. They are smarter than you think in that sense. So if they have subs, it won't be too many and when they get banned they have to invest again. So if you lift the restrictions it will only make gold sellers more active and make it even easier for them to operate. It's a like a dam that holds back the flood of gold sellers and you want to open the dam....that's just crazy.

 

Fact is that gold seller messages were virtually non existent before F2P and now I cannot go to the fleet or a starter planet without seeing them advertise. Give them more freedom and it will only get worse. Advertisement is just part of the problem but it's the most visual part.

 

Stolen credit cards and accounts.

 

Gold sellers don't pay for their own accounts, they rarely create their own accounts.

 

There is plenty of information about them out there, including documentaries talking to ex gold sellers, to know how they operate without coming up with all the misinformation in your post.

 

Gold sellers have been around since launch, I remember seeing them. I remember taking screenshots to report them but giving up altogether (I left the game, it no longer bothered me).

 

All MMO's that have any form of in game currency that can be traded have sellers. They steal accounts or pay for them using stolen bank or credit card details.

 

If anyone, for one second, thinks having a gold seller banned stops anything then they are incredibly naive. They just make another account using some other saps money or use someone's account they just stole.

 

Getting one gold seller banned actually makes it worse for someone else. It means they need to use someone's money to keep going. Doesn't bother the gold seller one bit, it's a minor inconvenience and nothing more.

[Lotharofxev]

What I'd like the parent company to do is identify who is buying the cartel packs? F2P / Pref / Sub. That would go a long way towards answering this (daily) discussion.

[Tsillah]

snip-a-deedoodah.

 

Still doesn't mean BW should make it even easier on them. These gold sellers find lots of ways...doesn't mean you have to open the doors wide to them.

[agamemnon-]

In my opinion, SWTOR's current model is overly restrictive. I do not believe one can seriously (or logically) argue against a relaxation of some of the restrictions. There are so many examples of f2p done right that to argue "doom and gloom" is silly.

[Jedi_riches]

I don't believe that f2p restrictions need changing, as a subscriber I would feel ripped off with any loosening of these there would have to be new additional benefits given to subs otherwise people would stop subscribing as it would not be worth it.

[FalmeseReb]

nobody cares about f2p people, if you want restrictions lifted put your money where your mouth is.

[Nexilein]

In my opinion, SWTOR's current model is overly restrictive. I do not believe one can seriously (or logically) argue against a relaxation of some of the restrictions. There are so many examples of f2p done right that to argue "doom and gloom" is silly.

 

Having games with less restrictive f2p models doesn't mean these games are better. I would rather state that the degree of restriction correlates with a game's quality: The better the game, the more restrictive a f2p model can be.

 

And in fact swtor's model isn't too restrictive: Beeing a subscriber for one or two month allows you to spend enough CC and credits to play f2p without significant restrictions for month!

A lot of people quitting SWTOR after launch were disapointed by the long term experience, but said they had a good time for two or three month. It's the subscription fee even disapointed players felt the game was worth the current f2p model is aiming at.

[Highsis]

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

 

1. Come on, you can google it and in 5 min you can see this generation's other F2P models have lighter restrictions than SWTOR.

 

2. Check starter planet character's buff status. 9 out of 10, they get sprint from level 1, and speeders from level 15. Observe how many players don't have those: not many. Starter planet has a huge pop because of 12 exp bonus at the moment and people re-rolling, and most of those are not F2P players.

 

And seriously, don't make a foolish accusation. EA doesn't regularly disclose its subscriber number, so of course nobody knows exact figures; however, I did bother to check other game's F2P restrictions(which is lighter) and sprint/mount status of new characters(alluding to few truly 'new players') instead of 'making them up,' so you will excuse me for getting frustrated at your expression.

Edited October 25, 2014 by Highsis

[Highsis]

nobody cares about f2p people, if you want restrictions lifted put your money where your mouth is.

 

 

I am and have been, and will be a sub.

 

That doesn't mean I can't concern myself with harsher F2P restrictions that stops inflow of new players. If the game starts stagnating with fewer new players and leaving players, that becomes your problem as well. It's something a lot more important than feeling envy to F2P getting some stuff for free. You can disagree with me whether or not it's bad for the game's future, but F2P's restrictions compared to competitors is a rather important matter regardless of your opinion.

[SunoTora]

This is the way I look at it. If you want a Free to Play game, go to Guild Wars 2, you have to buy the game outright, but after that it's totally utterly free, and if you don't like it, you can get a full refund within 30 days. You will never have to spend a penny in that game. They also release brand new content every 2 weeks.... FREE. They have a Gem Store (like the Cartel Market) and you can choose to spend your hard earned cash, or you can play long enough, save up enough gold, and trade in your gold (credits in SWTOR) for gems (Coins in the CM), never a penny.

 

If you want to pay a subscription fee, go play World of Warcraft, It has far more content, the entire game is cheap, has more variety of classes and abilities, significantly bigger "World". And every "reward" you get, feels like it helps you out, vs SWTOR you need a whole armor set every 5 levels to make it feel like you are kicking some ***. And WoW gives you something to do after you hit the level cap. Granted no voice acting which I can positively say was absolutely wonderful in SWTOR, finally felt like I wasn't reading a book every time I played a game.

 

But if you are hell bent on playing a "Space" game, you only have 2 options. Play Star Trek Online, very similar F2P system like GW2, and the game is completely free, don't have to buy it and you never have to spend a dime, don't be fooled by the awesome ships they have in their store, you can get better ones free if you wait long enough. OR you can play SWTOR. The problem with that is you HAVE to pay a subscription fee, their F2P model is an absolute complete joke. They take away from you 80% of the game, and throw it in your face every 5 minutes, "You can have it... if you pay for it"... Ultimately, it's up to you. It is free, try it, if you like it subscribe, if you don't, don't play it, it truly is not worth playing if you don't subscribe. And anyone who says, "Oh well it's free what are you complaining about"... to all those paying a sub, stop paying a sub, and let me know how long it took you before you started paying again.

 

I see some people saying, it's free stop ************, well guess what, there are other F2P games out there, and some are significantly better than SWTOR in ALL aspects. So what do I expect from F2P... I expect a FREE game, just like GW2 or STO, they are both completely free (aside from the box price for GW2) and they don't restrict anything. In SWTOR you can't even talk in chat, join a guild, join a party, send mail, your money is cut off at a certain very low point, and can't equip half the gear in the game, they take away legacy too? Like I said, they take away 80% of the game, say go quest. Might as well go play Skyrim if you are looking for an awesome solo questing experience.

 

*EDIT* On a side note. Guild Wars 2 has almost 4 millions players, SWTOR has almost 300k, who do you think makes more money? Point is, SWTOR may have more people playing their game, and have a higher income, if the lifted some of their F2P restrictions, or came up with another model.

Edited October 26, 2014 by SunoTora

[Anysao]

I'd like to see Free player forum access. Even if it was something like... Only accessible after ~30 days of playing, unable to post threads, and only ~5 posts a day.

[Ratajack]

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.

 

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, some see the current restrictions as punitive against those who are not paying the subscription (freeloaders).

 

Others see what the subs get versus those who choose to pay without paying (freeloaders) as incentive to subscribe.

 

Those two views are simply based on perspective. IMO, someone who is paying is more likely to feel that those restrictions are incentive to subscribe, while those choosing to play without paying are more likely to cast themselves in the role of the victim who is being punished for not paying. IMO, it makes no substantial difference what the subscriber gets that the person who does not pay does not get. IMO, the person who chooses to play without subscribing is more likely to see himself as the victim being punished no matter what the subscriber gets that he does not.

 

In regards to this game specifically, I think that many people "got used" to playing the whole game without restrictions when it was subscriber only. "Why do I have to pay to get what I had at release? I've been here since release. You owe me BW, even though I'm choosing to play for free now and you're not making one dime from me."

[CloudzDeven]

Snip

The issue with the whole "freeloader" train of thought is that preferred were either previous subs or bought something (aka not freeloaders) yet are restricted to pretty much the same standards as f2p. So it's not even just freeloaders, it's people who don't shell out $15 a month for the sub regardless of how much they spend on CC. The Cartel Market leads to some ambiguity about who's a freeloader and who's not, but the restrictions dividing f2p and pref aren't that different.

Edited October 26, 2014 by CloudzDeven

[Ratajack]

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.

 

A single $5 purchase will make a player preferred. IMO, that is NOT supporting the game.

[Ratajack]

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?

 

In that case, that homeless guy can go to the shelter down the street. If he chooses to stay in the shelter he is in, he forfeits his right to complain about the lack of beer, IMO.

[CloudzDeven]

A single $5 purchase will make a player preferred. IMO, that is NOT supporting the game.

 

So what about a $40 purchase for someone who wants to buy a hypercrate? What if someone doesn't want to sub, but wants to buy the occasional big item on the market? They're still freeloaders? Is subbing the only way to support the game?

 

In that case, that homeless guy can go to the shelter down the street. If he chooses to stay in the shelter he is in, he forfeits his right to complain about the lack of beer, IMO.

As a business the "if they don't like it they can go somewhere else" strategy really isn't the best idea. You tend to lose customers that way. If what SunoTora said is true about GW2, you'd think EA would like some of those 4 million players. Or they could just shrug I suppose. You're right though the homeless guy can choose to stay in the shelter or go to the other one. Some go to the better one.

Edited October 26, 2014 by CloudzDeven

[CloudzDeven]

Fail edit is fail Edited October 26, 2014 by CloudzDeven

[Ratajack]

The issue with the whole "freeloader" train of thought is that preferred were either previous subs or bought something (aka not freeloaders) yet are restricted to pretty much the same standards as f2p. So it's not even just freeloaders, it's people who don't shell out $15 a month for the sub regardless of how much they spend on CC. The Cartel Market leads to some ambiguity about who's a freeloader and who's not, but the restrictions dividing f2p and pref aren't that different.

 

First, while preferred players still have restrictions, they are NOT as restrictive as F2P.

 

Second, even a single $5 purchase will make a player preferred. Sure, there are some who were subscribers ONCE. Even if you subscribed for 2 years, if you are preferred, it means you are NOT paying to play any longer. This by definition, means you are now freeloading.

 

Go ahead, be like a poster in another thread and claim to spend $50 a month on CC's while not subscribing and complain that you are being punished.

 

I do not, for one second, believe that anyone who is not subscribing is buying even $15 worth of CC's each month. If I am wrong and there is a preferred player spending $15 month on CC's, then they can either choose to spend that $15 month to subscribe and play without restrictions while also getting 500 CC's or they can choose to get more CC's and play with the restrictions. It's up to them.

[Warrgames]

Every time I see a thread like this all I see is: I'm sub and want to go to f2p so remove restrictions so I can enjoy the same as a sub without paying for it.

 

I'm sorry the only thing F2P offer to the game is more people to queue with they offer no money to the game. Sub spending money in CM is where the money coming from. If the f2p are buying so much from CM, wouldn't it be cheaper to just sub?

[CloudzDeven]

Every time I see a thread like this all I see is: I'm sub and want to go to f2p so remove restrictions so I can enjoy the same as a sub without paying for it.

 

I'm sorry the only thing F2P offer to the game is more people to queue with they offer no money to the game. Sub spending money in CM is where the money coming from. If the f2p are buying so much from CM, wouldn't it be cheaper to just sub?

 

Depends on what you buy. A hypercrate is $40(around 4500cc) or more. If a sub chooses not to get any extra cc and they get 500cc per month at 15 bucks a month that would be 9 months and $135 for the one hypercrate. If they're trying to get unlocks then most likely it would be cheaper. For other items I'm not so sure. Can't say subbing is cheaper 100% of the time.

Edited October 27, 2014 by CloudzDeven

[Ratajack]

So what about a $40 purchase for someone who wants to buy a hypercrate? What if someone doesn't want to sub, but wants to buy the occasional big item on the market? They're still freeloaders? Is subbing the only way to support the game?

 

Subbing is not the only way to support the game, but it is one of the easiest ways to track a player's support. It is also ongoing, continuous, recurring revenue and not just a quick hit here and there.

 

 

As a business the "if they don't like it they can go somewhere else" strategy really isn't the best idea. You tend to lose customers that way. If what SunoTora said is true about GW2, you'd think EA would like some of those 4 million players. Or they could just shrug I suppose. You're right though the homeless guy can choose to stay in the shelter or go to the other one. Some go to the better one.

 

GW2 does not even have a subscription model. If it did, I'm sure there would be things that subscribers got that those who chose not pay to play did not get.

[Ratajack]

Depends on what you buy. A hypercrate is $40(around 4500cc) or more. If a sub chooses not to get any extra cc and they get 500cc per month at 15 bucks a month that would be 9 months and $135 for the one hypercrate. If they're trying to get unlocks then most likely it would be cheaper. For other items I'm not so sure. Can't say subbing is cheaper 100% of the time.

 

As I said, if that player chooses to buy $40 worth of CC's a month and not $25 worth of CC's and $15 to subscribe, then, IMO, they are choosing to play with restrictions.