More permanent increases, please. (Warzones, credit caps, etc.)

[gunitdragon]

Hello, everyone. I'm a returning subscriber for the new expansion. I played this game at launch and I can honestly say that for the 8 months or so that I played, it was the most fun time in gaming I've ever had. The KotOR games are my favorites of all time and ever since I played the first one, I wished for an MMO version.

 

Then a whole laundry list of things happened, both in my personal finances and in this game. My server was merged and my family and friends lost most, if not all of our names. My dad was probably the world-first person to have the name Kratos, since we got in just a few minutes after the head start got up. Anyway, I was no longer able to subscribe for several reasons after that, and frankly was a little bitter. I was given a bit of hope, though, when the game announced it would going free-to-play. And then I was greeted with what is, personally, the worst F2P model I've ever dealt with. I don't play every game out there, but most of them are F2P so I have a decent amount of experience with this.

 

The problem with this F2P model is that it is nearly impossible for a non-subscriber to play the game the way they want to play, if they're not doing the story mode. Most games put limits on bank space, inventory space, customization options, etc. But very few restrict actual base game content, such as warzones in this game. The Galactic Trade Market could theoretically solve this issue, but since it's dictated by the players who want the most bang for their buck, it doesn't seem to be helping. I checked the market to see what warzone passes go for these days, and there was only one weeklong pass up, for 500k credits. This is more than the preferred status credit cap of 350k and the basic status of 250k. How is a F2P player expected to get that? Buy escrow transfers? None available currently, and I would imagine they'd be ridiculously priced as well, if they were.

 

So, my suggestion is to put in the ability to buy permanent increases to the credit cap, or the number of warzones/operations/space battles you can do in a week. You'd have to cap what you can sell them at as well, so that the player base doesn't completely defeat the purpose. I haven't thought out any numbers specifically, but even as a subscriber I still look at the amount of restricted content F2P has and it makes me angry. It makes me angry because my friends can't play the way they want to, so they don't play.

 

Look at a game like Marvel Heroes, a game that started off terrible but won several game of the year awards last year. It's a completely F2P game with absolutely zero restricted content. Even most of the costumes can be earned, albeit randomly. The only thing you can't get for free, through work, is bank space. Which, granted, is a very important part of the game, but something that can be worked around, and is also not actual content. I can't expect this game to change it's model completely, but I use this as an example of a game where a free player can work to acquire the things they want instead of just being screwed into only being able to play one game mode.

 

TL;DR: I'm glad to be back but the game needs to be more free-player friendly, especially when it comes to unlocking content. Weekly or daily passes to content are simply terrible, and this game doesn't need them to make money.

 

EDIT: I forgot about LotRO. That game probably has the worst F2P. Another game that is really great, but only for subs.

Edited August 7, 2015 by gunitdragon

[MoskitoMando]

This would be great!

[Ratajack]

Hello, everyone. I'm a returning subscriber for the new expansion. I played this game at launch and I can honestly say that for the 8 months or so that I played, it was the most fun time in gaming I've ever had. The KotOR games are my favorites of all time and ever since I played the first one, I wished for an MMO version.

 

Then a whole laundry list of things happened, both in my personal finances and in this game. My server was merged and my family and friends lost most, if not all of our names. My dad was probably the world-first person to have the name Kratos, since we got in just a few minutes after the head start got up. Anyway, I was no longer able to subscribe for several reasons after that, and frankly was a little bitter. I was given a bit of hope, though, when the game announced it would going free-to-play. And then I was greeted with what is, personally, the worst F2P model I've ever dealt with. I don't play every game out there, but most of them are F2P so I have a decent amount of experience with this.

 

The problem with this F2P model is that it is nearly impossible for a non-subscriber to play the game the way they want to play, if they're not doing the story mode. Most games put limits on bank space, inventory space, customization options, etc. But very few restrict actual base game content, such as warzones in this game. The Galactic Trade Market could theoretically solve this issue, but since it's dictated by the players who want the most bang for their buck, it doesn't seem to be helping. I checked the market to see what warzone passes go for these days, and there was only one weeklong pass up, for 500k credits. This is more than the preferred status credit cap of 350k and the basic status of 250k. How is a F2P player expected to get that? Buy escrow transfers? None available currently, and I would imagine they'd be ridiculously priced as well, if they were.

 

So, my suggestion is to put in the ability to buy permanent increases to the credit cap, or the number of warzones/operations/space battles you can do in a week. You'd have to cap what you can sell them at as well, so that the player base doesn't completely defeat the purpose. I haven't thought out any numbers specifically, but even as a subscriber I still look at the amount of restricted content F2P has and it makes me angry. It makes me angry because my friends can't play the way they want to, so they don't play.

 

Look at a game like Marvel Heroes, a game that started off terrible but won several game of the year awards last year. It's a completely F2P game with absolutely zero restricted content. Even most of the costumes can be earned, albeit randomly. The only thing you can't get for free, through work, is bank space. Which, granted, is a very important part of the game, but something that can be worked around, and is also not actual content. I can't expect this game to change it's model completely, but I use this as an example of a game where a free player can work to acquire the things they want instead of just being screwed into only being able to play one game mode.

 

TL;DR: I'm glad to be back but the game needs to be more free-player friendly, especially when it comes to unlocking content. Weekly or daily passes to content are simply terrible, and this game doesn't need them to make money.

 

EDIT: I forgot about LotRO. That game probably has the worst F2P. Another game that is really great, but only for subs.

 

Yet another "give me more for FREE" or "I want to play with fewer or no restrictions, but I don't want to pay" thread.

 

If you want to play with no restrictions, then the answer is simple--SUBSCRIBE.

[Stoofa]

Yet another "give me more for FREE" or "I want to play with fewer or no restrictions, but I don't want to pay" thread.

 

If you want to play with no restrictions, then the answer is simple--SUBSCRIBE.

 

It's the crux of nearly every single "F2P model needs to change" post.

[Theeko]

They need to give subs more perks, not the ones that don't support

[therandyman]

It's the crux of nearly every single "F2P model needs to change" post.

 

Yep. "If they make X change to preferred, I can play everything I want to without subbing! What kind of argument can I make to make it sound like I actually want the game to improve? Better queues? More players online? More people buying from the CM?"

 

Yes, I've seen all of those in one or more of these threads.

[gunitdragon]

I think everyone here is forgetting that subscribers can't even post on the forums (another terrible thing, even if it prevents gold spammers.) I am a subscriber. I plan to be a subscriber. As long as I can afford it, I will be a subscriber. But the answer for everyone is not as a simple as just subscribing. This isn't about me, this is about the comparison between this "Free to play" game and some of the other ones that are truly free-to-play, and the fact that this game does not take into consideration the fact that the most played game in the world is completely free to play. League of Legends has 27 million people active a day, and the only thing that you have to pay for is unlocking characters quicker (something you can work in game for) and skins that have no bearing on actual gameplay or content. Now, I'm not saying this game is suddenly going to pick up 15 million players if they change the model, but I'm sure there are players who want to play but don't feel like they can even be part of the community with how restrictive it is. I don't understand the elitist culture that develops among subscribers in any game. Despite what any of you may believe, you're not somehow better people than non-subscribers. Maybe there should be more benefits for subscribers, but that doesn't mean that several sections of the game have to be almost completely sectioned off for people that want to play but can't afford it. And some say that the community takes a hit in free-to-play games, but my experience is very different. I don't play League of Legends, but in most F2P games I play, the community is inclusive and kind. I'm not a begger, I've spent money on the game and I'm willing to support it. But the half-way F2P bothers me to no end because it's essentially a trial.

[Ratajack]

I think everyone here is forgetting that subscribers can't even post on the forums (another terrible thing, even if it prevents gold spammers.) I am a subscriber. I plan to be a subscriber. As long as I can afford it, I will be a subscriber. But the answer for everyone is not as a simple as just subscribing. This isn't about me, this is about the comparison between this "Free to play" game and some of the other ones that are truly free-to-play, and the fact that this game does not take into consideration the fact that the most played game in the world is completely free to play. League of Legends has 27 million people active a day, and the only thing that you have to pay for is unlocking characters quicker (something you can work in game for) and skins that have no bearing on actual gameplay or content. Now, I'm not saying this game is suddenly going to pick up 15 million players if they change the model, but I'm sure there are players who want to play but don't feel like they can even be part of the community with how restrictive it is. I don't understand the elitist culture that develops among subscribers in any game. Despite what any of you may believe, you're not somehow better people than non-subscribers. Maybe there should be more benefits for subscribers, but that doesn't mean that several sections of the game have to be almost completely sectioned off for people that want to play but can't afford it. And some say that the community takes a hit in free-to-play games, but my experience is very different. I don't play League of Legends, but in most F2P games I play, the community is inclusive and kind. I'm not a begger, I've spent money on the game and I'm willing to support it. But the half-way F2P bothers me to no end because it's essentially a trial.

 

This sums up the F2P model perfectly, IMO.

 

This game is NOT an F2P game.

 

I think it may be easier to understand if look at it from the perspective that this is NOT an F2P game with an option to subscribe. This is a SUBSCRIPTION game with the option to play without having to play the subscription.

 

 

 

A simple one time purchase of $5 will raise an F2P player to preferred status and fewer restrictions. A preferred player may have spent $5 one time, or t hey may have been a subscriber for years, but the fact remains that the preferred player is NOT paying the subscription fee now.

 

I'm continuously amazed at the attitudes of the F2P and preferred players who want to complain that even though they play for FREE, there are restrictions with which they have to live, rather than simply being thankful that they can even play without subscribing. It's like a teenager who, when he sees his parents just bought him a brand new Camaro, says "I want and DESERVE a Corvette". There's a word for that kind of attitude.

[Nightblazer]

Here's a good video about how F2P should work

 

 

What does everyone think about what they say compared to how the gsme's model is?

[gunitdragon]

Here's a good video about how F2P should work

 

 

What does everyone think about what they say compared to how the gsme's model is?

 

Thank you, Nightblazer. This video perfectly describes how I feel. I consider this game in the second type of how to not do F2P. There is so much about this game that you simply cannot experience in the right way if you're not a subscriber.

 

Once again, I must ask, what is it about subscriptions that causes this feeling of superiority to non-subscribers? Every time someone says a free-to-play model is bad, the easy answer is "Just subscribe." It would seem to me that these people have never experienced financial hardship from the way they talk, as if people who can't afford it don't deserve to enjoy the game. Also, financial support is not the only way to support a game. Telling your friends about it, building the community by word of mouth, is a 100% valid way to support the game as well. The more people you have, the more chances you have at receiving income from those players. It's simple. If you provide a good experience and treat your players well, it's much more likely that they will spend money because they want to, not because they feel like they have to. Exactly like the video says. Trust me. I have known a lot of people in the gaming community, especially in F2P games, and the reason for not subscribing is never "I just don't want to," unless that person doesn't have the time to make full use of the money spent.

[Ratajack]

Thank you, Nightblazer. This video perfectly describes how I feel. I consider this game in the second type of how to not do F2P. There is so much about this game that you simply cannot experience in the right way if you're not a subscriber.

 

Once again, I must ask, what is it about subscriptions that causes this feeling of superiority to non-subscribers? Every time someone says a free-to-play model is bad, the easy answer is "Just subscribe." It would seem to me that these people have never experienced financial hardship from the way they talk, as if people who can't afford it don't deserve to enjoy the game. Also, financial support is not the only way to support a game. Telling your friends about it, building the community by word of mouth, is a 100% valid way to support the game as well. The more people you have, the more chances you have at receiving income from those players. It's simple. If you provide a good experience and treat your players well, it's much more likely that they will spend money because they want to, not because they feel like they have to. Exactly like the video says. Trust me. I have known a lot of people in the gaming community, especially in F2P games, and the reason for not subscribing is never "I just don't want to," unless that person doesn't have the time to make full use of the money spent.

 

The difference is that this game was NOT designed from the ground up as an F2P game. It was designed (and, IMO, remains) a SUBSCRIPTION game, albeit with the option to play without paying that subscription.

 

In either type of game, F2P or "freemium", there are two types of players--those that DO support the game financially and those that do not.

 

In a game designed from the ground up as F2P, those that will contribute financially are often referred to as "whales" and can often spend hundreds dollars in the micro-transaction markets while those that do not financially support the game continue to reap the benefits funded and subsidized by the "whales". After all, why PAY to play when they can get it all (or at least all of the parts of the game they enjoy) for free?

 

In a "freemium" game, such as this one, the "whales" still contribute financially, often in the hundreds of dollars a month", but part of that contribution is in the form of the subscription. The vast majority of the CM income is generated by subscribers and not by F2P or preferred. The "whales" continue to fund and subsidize game development, such as new content, new CM items, etc.

 

Subscriptions are recurring revenue, while CC purchases are one time quick hits of revenue.

 

In a "freemium" game, or at least every "Freemium" game I have played, there are benefits to subscribing, things subscribers get that those that do not subscribe do not get. These benefits are incentives to subscribe.

 

If you give away the entire game for free, how do you propose to add enough value to a subscription to continue to generate the recurring, predictable revenue that subscriptions provide as opposed to the quick one time hits of revenue from the CM? What incentives do you propose adding for subscribers if you are giving the entire game to the F2P?

 

 

 

If you say that F2P should not get the entire game for FREE, then you are still restricting things behind a pay wall, and where do you propose to draw the line for those restrictions, remembering that no matter where YOU draw the line, there will always be someone who thinks the line should be drawn somewhere else. Should BW continue to redraw the "restriction line" every time someone comes to the forums asking for MORE for those that play for FREE?

 

BTW, I am VERY happy to pay the $15/month to subscribe, as well as the occasional CC purchase. So, for at least one person, they are meeting that "make the customer WANT to spend money on the game" criteria.

 

 

On a last note, if someone TRULY cannot afford to pay $15/month to play without restrictions, then maybe they have bigger issues than restrictions in a video game and should be focusing their efforts in another direction. $15 for 30 days of unlimited access to the game is a terrific deal, IMO. The only limits on the amount of time a player can spend in game for $15 are those set by the PLAYER, not BW.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Ratajack

[XiamaraSimi]

Yet another "give me more for FREE" or "I want to play with fewer or no restrictions, but I don't want to pay" thread.

 

If you want to play with no restrictions, then the answer is simple--SUBSCRIBE.

 

 

This.

 

Oh, and this too,

Edited August 8, 2015 by XiamaraSimi

[gunitdragon]

No one except for the first guy seems to understand where I'm coming from. I'm a subscriber just like everyone else here, and I plan to be as long as I am capable. But I don't want to feel like if at any point I can't subscribe, I'm going to be screwed, because that's how it will feel if it comes to that.

 

At the very least, I think there should be a level above preferred that takes into account how much subscription time you've had or cartel coins you've bought, so that those who support the game as much as they can aren't kicked to the curb if they lose their job, or have a large medical expense, or have extreme car trouble, or any number of the infinite amount of things that happen on a daily basis to normal, working people who chose to give this game (or whatever game) their money when they have it. Things happen, life takes unfortunate turns, and when things get tough, that's when we need escapes like SWTOR more than ever.

 

How many times have you seen somebody say that gaming saved their life? Helped them with their depression? Helped them recover from drug or alcohol abuse? Often times it's MMOs that serve this purpose, because they provide a sense of community, in the same way church does for some people. And this a Star Wars game, a property and a mythos that can inspire childlike wonder and happiness like very few others.

 

But I can see my opinion is not a popular one, because everyone has this unbelievably absurd notion that I'm a moocher or I just want more free stuff, despite knowing nothing about me.

 

There is any number of things they could give subscribers as incentive to subscribe, even if they were a little more lenient on preferred status players. Champions online gives an exclusive costume piece every month. Everquest 2 puts no restrictions on bank or bag space. Are you honestly telling me that you wouldn't subscribe anymore if they put fewer restrictions in for preferred or free players and more incentives for subscribers? Lenient free-to-play models do very well critically, which attracts more people. Fewer restrictions and a more complete game would mean more people, and without fail, more people equals more money.

[Ratajack]

No one except for the first guy seems to understand where I'm coming from. I'm a subscriber just like everyone else here, and I plan to be as long as I am capable. But I don't want to feel like if at any point I can't subscribe, I'm going to be screwed, because that's how it will feel if it comes to that.

 

At the very least, I think there should be a level above preferred that takes into account how much subscription time you've had or cartel coins you've bought, so that those who support the game as much as they can aren't kicked to the curb if they lose their job, or have a large medical expense, or have extreme car trouble, or any number of the infinite amount of things that happen on a daily basis to normal, working people who chose to give this game (or whatever game) their money when they have it. Things happen, life takes unfortunate turns, and when things get tough, that's when we need escapes like SWTOR more than ever.

 

How many times have you seen somebody say that gaming saved their life? Helped them with their depression? Helped them recover from drug or alcohol abuse? Often times it's MMOs that serve this purpose, because they provide a sense of community, in the same way church does for some people. And this a Star Wars game, a property and a mythos that can inspire childlike wonder and happiness like very few others.

 

But I can see my opinion is not a popular one, because everyone has this unbelievably absurd notion that I'm a moocher or I just want more free stuff, despite knowing nothing about me.

 

There is any number of things they could give subscribers as incentive to subscribe, even if they were a little more lenient on preferred status players. Champions online gives an exclusive costume piece every month. Everquest 2 puts no restrictions on bank or bag space. Are you honestly telling me that you wouldn't subscribe anymore if they put fewer restrictions in for preferred or free players and more incentives for subscribers? Lenient free-to-play models do very well critically, which attracts more people. Fewer restrictions and a more complete game would mean more people, and without fail, more people equals more money.

 

More people only equals more money if those people are PAYING, which by definition, F2P are NOT. Why do people feel they are entitled to everything in the game with no restrictions for FREE?

 

Why do you think that someone who is paying NOTHING to play this game should have access to everything the player who is actually financially supporting this game (with his subscription and CC purchases) gets?

 

If you want to play with no restrictions, the answer is simple. SUBSCRIBE.

 

If a player is TRULY having financial difficulties, then maybe they should focus their attention in that direction, and if they TRULY need the "escape" of this game, then maybe be THANKFUL that they can play for FREE, rather than B***H and COMPLAIN that they have a few restrictions, and don't get EVERYTHING for FREE.

 

It is NOT elitism to expect that subscribers (those who actually PAY and financially support this game) get more then those that choose to play for FREE, leeching off those who pay.

 

It IS an entitled attitude to expect to be able to pay a subscription game for FREE with no restrictions. It is also not unusual for those with this entitled attitude to attempt to make those who actually support this game financially look like the "bad guys".

[XiamaraSimi]

As Rat said, if youcant afford $15 a month, perhaps you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Even kids can deliver papers and mow lawns for cash.

 

Instead of complaining you dont get all the goodies you -want- perhaps maybe be happy with what you get for -free-? I sure would -like- some fancy Prada shoes, but i can live with non Prada shoes. Im not going to send them letters demanding they just give me free Prada shoes just because i want them but cant afford them.

 

Life isnt a magical candyland where everything you want is just given to you, you either earn it, or you pick that your willing to accept not having things that you -wont- pay for.

 

Maybe this scenario will help:

 

-a starving man walks into a restaraunt and asks for something to eat and drink, the restaraunt owner gives him a glass of milk and a peanut butter sandwhich, starving man throws the sandwhich down and demands to be given the champagne and cavier he sees the paying customers having-

 

Stop being the entitled starving man and be happy with what you get for free.

Edited August 9, 2015 by XiamaraSimi

[gunitdragon]

As Rat said, if youcant afford $15 a month, perhaps you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Even kids can deliver papers and mow lawns for cash.

 

Instead of complaining you dont get all the goodies you -want- perhaps maybe be happy with what you get for -free-? I sure would -like- some fancy Prada shoes, but i can live with non Prada shoes. Im not going to send them letters demanding they just give me free Prada shoes just because i want them but cant afford them.

 

Life isnt a magical candyland where everything you want is just given to you, you either earn it, or you pick that your willing to accept not having things that you -wont- pay for.

 

Maybe this scenario will help:

 

-a starving man walks into a restaraunt and asks for something to eat and drink, the restaraunt owner gives him a glass of milk and a peanut butter sandwhich, starving man throws the sandwhich down and demands to be given the champagne and cavier he sees the paying customers having-

 

Stop being the entitled starving man and be happy with what you get for free.

 

This analogy only works if you keep in mind that there's a restaurant across the street that will give the starving man the caviar that he asks for, without even offering the peanut butter sandwich in the first place.

 

We live in a new age of MMO gaming, where there are games everywhere that will give you the content that I'm suggesting for free. Now, of course, this particular game is a unique product in it's universe and story driven content, but it's not like it's the most unique game that's ever existed. If you can play a game with no restrictions, or play a game with restrictions on literally every aspect but one, which would you choose? As I've previously cited, Marvel Heroes and League of Legends do this. Guild Wars 2 is a one-time purchase and you get the entire game, minus any expansions that come out, which would fit with the idea of a 4th tier in between subscriber and preferred that I suggested above. Even games like LotRO and Everquest 2, while perhaps not great for free to play players, both games allow for one-time purchases for lifting restrictions, such as classes you can't play or bank space you can't have. There is a way to spend money on the game and not subscribe, which is another thing I feel this game is missing, as evidenced by my first suggestion. EDIT: Of course I realize that the Cartel Market is a way to spend money without subscribing. I feel the need to clarify that what I mean is a way to unlock specific privileges that subscription players earn, so that someone who is perhaps not interested in PVP but highly interested in raiding and other group content, does not need to pay a subscription fee and gain access to Starship battles and warzones when they don't care about those.

 

In any game with a popular free-to-play model, there is either a plausible workaround of the pay-wall for content, or simply no pay-wall for content and it relies totally on micro transactions for aesthetics and such. I never suggested that this game should go the second route, however much I might prefer it. My original suggestion was that there simply be a more feasible way to play the game the way you choose with preferred. Right now, there is a way to do it, but it's extremely difficult and reliant on the way the GTN is shaping up that particular week. But now, the conversation has derailed into a moral discussion of whether free to play players deserve anything more than the comparatively tiny bit that they get, or whether they should be thankful for the existence of a game that provides less to do than some other games, for the same price - free.

 

In addition, your Prada analogy doesn't exactly work because that has literally no effect on your mobility or your ability to function. A more accurate analogy is if you said that unless you paid $15 a month, you were able to wear shoes at all times when going from home to work and vice versa. The basic stuff. But you only have 3 hours of the week where you can wear shoes anywhere else; the park, the basketball court, etc. Things you don't need, but would surely increase your quality of life. And then on a completely separate level, you can buy some Prada shoes instead of paying for the ability to wear shoes elsewhere. The Prada shoes are the cosmetic cartel market items that have no effect on the gameplay.

 

Also, and this is the last thing I'll say as far as this particular part of the discussion, it seems to me that the two of you are looking at people who can't pay the subscription fee in a very narrow way. Correct me if I'm wrong on that, please. But simply assuming that they're all without jobs is actually pretty offensive, and I'm a very difficult person to offend. What if someone, a subscriber of this game since launch, is and has been working a full-time job as a manager at a Subway (or wherever, doesn't matter) and their child or spouse has an accident and they have medical bills through the roof. Are you actually going to suggest that they're spending the little amount of free time that they have incorrectly by playing the game they've put time a considerable amount of time into already? And is it really bad to feel a little entitled to some special treatment after they've supported the game for almost 4 years?

 

This isn't a fantasy scenario. Things like this happen all the time. In fact, and I won't get into details, something like this happened to me before and has happened to plenty of my friends, in the sense of non-work related financial issues. These people are not doing anything wrong by working and being contributing members of society, and then wanting to play a game to escape the stress.

 

Anyway, as I've said before, this thread has gone off topic a bit. So I will now ask a question to get it back to the original point. Is there anything that, as a subscriber, you would be willing to allow free-to-play players to have or a restriction that could be lifted that would not effect your desire to subscribe? How great do you feel the gap needs to be between preferred and subscriber so that you feel subscribing is worth it?

Edited August 9, 2015 by gunitdragon

[Ratajack]

This analogy only works if you keep in mind that there's a restaurant across the street that will give the starving man the caviar that he asks for, without even offering the peanut butter sandwich in the first place.

 

If that starving man wants the caviar for free, then he perhaps he should simply go across the street and get it for free from "that other restaurant". It might have a different decor, but what is more important to him--the free caviar or the decor?

 

We live in a new age of MMO gaming, where there are games everywhere that will give you the content that I'm suggesting for free. Now, of course, this particular game is a unique product in it's universe and story driven content, but it's not like it's the most unique game that's ever existed. If you can play a game with no restrictions, or play a game with restrictions on literally every aspect but one, which would you choose? As I've previously cited, Marvel Heroes and League of Legends do this. Guild Wars 2 is a one-time purchase and you get the entire game, minus any expansions that come out, which would fit with the idea of a 4th tier in between subscriber and preferred that I suggested above. Even games like LotRO and Everquest 2, while perhaps not great for free to play players, both games allow for one-time purchases for lifting restrictions, such as classes you can't play or bank space you can't have. There is a way to spend money on the game and not subscribe, which is another thing I feel this game is missing, as evidenced by my first suggestion. EDIT: Of course I realize that the Cartel Market is a way to spend money without subscribing. I feel the need to clarify that what I mean is a way to unlock specific privileges that subscription players earn, so that someone who is perhaps not interested in PVP but highly interested in raiding and other group content, does not need to pay a subscription fee and gain access to Starship battles and warzones when they don't care about those.

 

Just as with the restaurant, that player has the option to go play one of those other games for FREE. What is more important to the player--the ability to play WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS for FREE or the ability to play "Star Wars" for FREE? Sometimes in life, you can't have everything you want and you have to decide where your priorities lie.

 

In any game with a popular free-to-play model, there is either a plausible workaround of the pay-wall for content, or simply no pay-wall for content and it relies totally on micro transactions for aesthetics and such. I never suggested that this game should go the second route, however much I might prefer it. My original suggestion was that there simply be a more feasible way to play the game the way you choose with preferred. Right now, there is a way to do it, but it's extremely difficult and reliant on the way the GTN is shaping up that particular week. But now, the conversation has derailed into a moral discussion of whether free to play players deserve anything more than the comparatively tiny bit that they get, or whether they should be thankful for the existence of a game that provides less to do than some other games, for the same price - free.

 

Here we have what appears to be the motivation for your request, despite your "claims" that you intend to continue subscribing. Are you subscribing because you want to support this game financially or because you want to play with no restrictions? If your "request" for a "more feasible way to play the game the way you choose with preferred" were granted, would you still subscribe? I highly doubt you would.

 

You can unlock most of the restrictions in this game. You can purchase those restrictions via credits or CC's and you can purchase character specific or account wide unlocks.

 

A couple of one time CC purchases will get you most of the unlocks at the account wide level. If you want to use credits and not CC's, then a single month subscription to remove the credit cap so that you can purchase those unlocks from the GTN might be an answer.

 

The credit cap cannot be removed, but you CAN purchase escrows. You cannot permanently unlock FP's, OP's or WZ's, but you can purchase weekly passes, again either via CC's or credits using the GTN. You can even stock up on those passes while subscribed so that you can use them while playing for FREE.

 

There are options to have a "more feasible way to play the game the way you choose with preferred", but you CANNOT get everything for FREE.

 

In addition, your Prada analogy doesn't exactly work because that has literally no effect on your mobility or your ability to function. A more accurate analogy is if you said that unless you paid $15 a month, you were able to wear shoes at all times when going from home to work and vice versa. The basic stuff. But you only have 3 hours of the week where you can wear shoes anywhere else; the park, the basketball court, etc. Things you don't need, but would surely increase your quality of life. And then on a completely separate level, you can buy some Prada shoes instead of paying for the ability to wear shoes elsewhere. The Prada shoes are the cosmetic cartel market items that have no effect on the gameplay.

 

Again, what are your priorities? Is it more important to simply have shoes to wear, and have them for FREE, or is it more important to have the things you don't "need" but simply "want"?

 

Also, and this is the last thing I'll say as far as this particular part of the discussion, it seems to me that the two of you are looking at people who can't pay the subscription fee in a very narrow way. Correct me if I'm wrong on that, please. But simply assuming that they're all without jobs is actually pretty offensive, and I'm a very difficult person to offend. What if someone, a subscriber of this game since launch, is and has been working a full-time job as a manager at a Subway (or wherever, doesn't matter) and their child or spouse has an accident and they have medical bills through the roof. Are you actually going to suggest that they're spending the little amount of free time that they have incorrectly by playing the game they've put time a considerable amount of time into already? And is it really bad to feel a little entitled to some special treatment after they've supported the game for almost 4 years?

 

This isn't a fantasy scenario. Things like this happen all the time. In fact, and I won't get into details, something like this happened to me before and has happened to plenty of my friends, in the sense of non-work related financial issues. These people are not doing anything wrong by working and being contributing members of society, and then wanting to play a game to escape the stress.

 

I do not think anyone has simply stated or assumed that those not paying a subscription do not have jobs. I think we understand that sometimes things happen.

 

In fact, at least two posters have pointed out that if the player paying for FREE simply and truly CANNOT afford the $15 to subscribe, then maybe that person should be focusing there efforts in a different direction than playing a game. Whether that focus may be caring for the person that needed that medical help or looking for a new job, IMO, it should take priority over playing a game, and especially over B***HING and COMPLAINING that they do not get the ENTIRE GAME for FREE.

 

IMO, it is definitely NOT the best attitude to feel "entitled to special treatment" when you are playing for FREE. When one is being given a gift (the ability to play for FREE), IMO, one should accept that gift graciously and not complain that "they deserve more".

 

Anyway, as I've said before, this thread has gone off topic a bit. So I will now ask a question to get it back to the original point. Is there anything that, as a subscriber, you would be willing to allow free-to-play players to have or a restriction that could be lifted that would not effect your desire to subscribe? How great do you feel the gap needs to be between preferred and subscriber so that you feel subscribing is worth it?

 

IMO, unless subscriber benefits are significantly increased, there is nothing that F2P or preferred should have over what they already get for FREE.

[gunitdragon]

From your most recent post, it is abundantly clear that you either forgot the point of my original post, or never read it in the first place and assumed that I was simply asking for more free things, which I did not do. At all.

 

The entire point of the first post is that there is clearly an attempt to allow for a F2P workaround, but that it was not being implemented well because it's extremely difficult to achieve your goals, depending on what they are, and very dependent on who is selling what on the GTN and if you're lucky enough to get it. Everything that you noted is covered in my first post, and I am saying that it doesn't work as well as I believe it should.

 

You have also, not even for a moment, addressed the idea of a 4th tier between subscription and preferred, for those that have spent $100+ dollars on the game, or whatever number you might choose, but are not active subscribers. What are your problems with this concept? Are you saying that I have not supported the game financially?

 

When it comes to my subscription status, you are right on one thing; if, for some inexplicable reason, they gave preferred status players all the benefits of subscription players, of course I would not pay the subscription fee. But I would buy things from the cartel market. I pay the subscription fee for 2 reasons; I do not feel like I can play the game to any remote level of enjoyment without a subscription, and I want the rewards they are giving out leading up to the expansion. If I did not have the first reason as an excuse, I absolutely, without a doubt. would pay the subscription fee for the rewards they are giving away. I do think there should be more exclusive items that subscribers get, like I noted with my Champions Online comparison. I would like to believe that my support means that someone is listening to my opinion as well.

 

I never suggested for even half a second that subscribers get too much. In fact, if you read my posts, I suggested multiple times that subscribers should get more if F2P or Preferred got more. It is only fair. I also never suggested that the model change completely.

 

The point of this thread was to highlight a suggestion, and potentially gather more suggestions, to provide a more player-friendly experience for all involved, something any game should strive for. As I've said many times, a better gameplay experience and a feeling that the company is not all about money leads to more players, and more players leads to more money. I was expecting some disagreements, but nothing so hostile, and at least I was hoping for something constructive. But judging by your last statement in your post, you are more concerned about what players shouldn't get, rather than what they should get. Your first post clearly shows that you've seen a lot of begging threads, and are tired of them. This is not a begging thread, and I'm sorry if you misconstrued it as one.

 

I am happy with what I currently am getting in the game. Sure, I'd never turn down more, I'm not that proud. But the point of this thread is I would like to be able to make a convincing argument to my friends and to others I meet in the gaming community that this is a quality game to played, and that the pricing is reasonable for those that don't want to pay a subscription. The amount of people who don't want to pay a subscription is growing by the minute, and their arguments are usually valid. There are games that accommodate all kinds of payment and playstyles very well, like the previously named Everquest 2. This is not one of them.

Edited August 9, 2015 by gunitdragon

[Icestar]

I think it is fine the way it is now, players must want to subscribe and more free options in the game is not the way to go. Edited August 9, 2015 by Icestar

[XiamaraSimi]

You dont -need- those things from the gtn, you -want- them.

 

Anything you -need- gearwise in game you can earn by, shocker i know, playing the game... need mods and whatnot? Trade comms for them. What else do you -need- ?

 

Fancy mounts, titles, toys, pets, cartel weapons/armor and things you can buy from the GTN? You dont -need- those, you -want- them. Hence my Prada shoes example. I dont -need- prada shoes, i can get by just fine with shoes from Payless Shoe Source, i might -want- them, but i realize if i -want- them i need to -earn- them, not just demand they be given to me like a spoiled child.

[Ratajack]

From your most recent post, it is abundantly clear that you either forgot the point of my original post, or never read it in the first place and assumed that I was simply asking for more free things, which I did not do. At all.

 

The entire point of the first post is that there is clearly an attempt to allow for a F2P workaround, but that it was not being implemented well because it's extremely difficult to achieve your goals, depending on what they are, and very dependent on who is selling what on the GTN and if you're lucky enough to get it. Everything that you noted is covered in my first post, and I am saying that it doesn't work as well as I believe it should.

 

If I understand you correctly, the entire point of the original post is to "suggest" that players who do not subscribe get even MORE for FREE. That sums up the original post pretty well.

 

You have also, not even for a moment, addressed the idea of a 4th tier between subscription and preferred, for those that have spent $100+ dollars on the game, or whatever number you might choose, but are not active subscribers. What are your problems with this concept? Are you saying that I have not supported the game financially?

 

If BW were to add a fourth tier, where would you draw the line? How do you even determine where to draw the line?

 

Do you draw the line at length of subscription? Do you draw the line at a certain amount of CC's purchased?

 

Does the person who has subscribed since launch but purchased NO CC's more deserving of the fourth tier than the person who has only subscribed for a year, but has purchased over $100 in CC's each and every month during that year?

 

I think you also want to ignore the most important factor in the hopes that many who read this thread miss it. Regardless of how much any given preferred player spent in the past, F2P and preferred are paying NOTHING NOW. They are playing for FREE. F2P have NEVER financially supported this game, and preferred are not currently supporting the game.

 

That is the important factor, They are playing for FREE.

 

When it comes to my subscription status, you are right on one thing; if, for some inexplicable reason, they gave preferred status players all the benefits of subscription players, of course I would not pay the subscription fee. But I would buy things from the cartel market. I pay the subscription fee for 2 reasons; I do not feel like I can play the game to any remote level of enjoyment without a subscription, and I want the rewards they are giving out leading up to the expansion. If I did not have the first reason as an excuse, I absolutely, without a doubt. would pay the subscription fee for the rewards they are giving away. I do think there should be more exclusive items that subscribers get, like I noted with my Champions Online comparison. I would like to believe that my support means that someone is listening to my opinion as well.

 

DING DING DING

 

This is what I, and others, have been saying all along. If BW gives the game away for FREE, why would anyone subscribe? Why subscribe if they get the whole game for FREE?

 

 

 

I never suggested for even half a second that subscribers get too much. In fact, if you read my posts, I suggested multiple times that subscribers should get more if F2P or Preferred got more. It is only fair. I also never suggested that the model change completely.

 

The point of this thread was to highlight a suggestion, and potentially gather more suggestions, to provide a more player-friendly experience for all involved, something any game should strive for. As I've said many times, a better gameplay experience and a feeling that the company is not all about money leads to more players, and more players leads to more money. I was expecting some disagreements, but nothing so hostile, and at least I was hoping for something constructive. But judging by your last statement in your post, you are more concerned about what players shouldn't get, rather than what they should get. Your first post clearly shows that you've seen a lot of begging threads, and are tired of them. This is not a begging thread, and I'm sorry if you misconstrued it as one.

 

The point of this thread is to "suggest" that players who do not subscribe get even MORE for FREE. It IS a begging thread. It may be more cleverly worded and disguised, but it IS a begging thread and nothing less.

 

I am happy with what I currently am getting in the game. Sure, I'd never turn down more, I'm not that proud. But the point of this thread is I would like to be able to make a convincing argument to my friends and to others I meet in the gaming community that this is a quality game to played, and that the pricing is reasonable for those that don't want to pay a subscription. The amount of people who don't want to pay a subscription is growing by the minute, and their arguments are usually valid. There are games that accommodate all kinds of payment and playstyles very well, like the previously named Everquest 2. This is not one of them.

 

This game is, IMO, worth the cost of subscription.

 

Those choosing not to pay the subscription need to remember the important fact that they get to play for FREE, and not focus on what those players who actually PAY the subscription get.

 

YOU, as a subscriber, can refer your friends and they will get the benefit of 7 days of subscriber status, as well as the bundle containing many of the unlocks.

 

YOU, as a subscriber, can purchase those unlocks from the GTN and give them to your friends and let your friends pay you back for them over time, as their credit cap allows.

 

YOU, as a subscriber, can make your friends game play a "more rewarding experience" if that is truly your goal.

 

BW does not need to give the game away for FREE, just so you or your friends can play with no restrictions for FREE.

[gunitdragon]

If I understand you correctly, the entire point of the original post is to "suggest" that players who do not subscribe get even MORE for FREE. That sums up the original post pretty well.

 

Wrong.

 

Wrong.

 

Wrong.

 

What I have suggested is instead of temporary passes or escrow transfers in the cartel market, put permanent increases to the restrictions into the cartel market. Not complete restriction lifts, just increases to the limits. Like the permanent unlock of a player race, or of a customization option. It doesn't have to be account wide. It can be for one character. Doesn't matter. Just something that allows for these aspects to be unlocked without perpetual upkeep. The benefits for free-to-play players are there, but it also allows those that are willing to pay, but not for a subscription, a better way to play.

 

So for this entire thread, because I do believe that this game is not friendly enough to non-subscribers, I've been defending my point of view on something that is not what this thread was about, letting you and the others involved berate me for being "entitled" or a "leech". I have been distracted by you, but now I realize you have no interest in civil discussion about it, only about getting rid of the "leeches" who "don't support the game." Because somehow, the hundreds of dollars I've spent on the game are not support.

 

I will no longer respond to any posts calling me or others entitled, or bringing up whether or not this F2P model is "just fine the way it is." This isn't about free players, this isn't about preferred, this isn't about subscribers. This about a better way to play the game the way you want to play, while still making money for the company.

Edited August 10, 2015 by gunitdragon

[Ratajack]

Wrong.

 

Wrong.

 

Wrong.

 

What I have suggested is instead of temporary passes or escrow transfers in the cartel market, put permanent increases to the restrictions into the cartel market. Not complete restriction lifts, just increases to the limits. Like the permanent unlock of a player race, or of a customization option. It doesn't have to be account wide. It can be for one character. Doesn't matter. Just something that allows for these aspects to be unlocked without perpetual upkeep. The benefits for free-to-play players are there, but it also allows those that are willing to pay, but not for a subscription, a better way to play.

 

So for this entire thread, because I do believe that this game is not friendly enough to non-subscribers, I've been defending my point of view on something that is not what this thread was about, letting you and the others involved berate me for being "entitled" or a "leech". I have been distracted by you, but now I realize you have no interest in civil discussion about it, only about getting rid of the "leeches" who "don't support the game." Because somehow, the hundreds of dollars I've spent on the game are not support.

 

I will no longer respond to any posts calling me or others entitled, or bringing up whether or not this F2P model is "just fine the way it is." This isn't about free players, this isn't about preferred, this isn't about subscribers. This about a better way to play the game the way you want to play, while still making money for the company.

 

Exactly. You want to give those who do not subscribe a way that they can have MORE while they play for FREE.

 

It is not that I want to "get rid of the leeches". I simply do not see any reason to give those who play for FREE more than they already get for that price.

 

There are certain restrictions that CANNOT be permanently unlocked. These restrictions, including the credit caps, WZ and OP's passes, provide incentive to subscribe. They can be temporarily removed or lessened, but even a subscription will not "permanently" remove those restrictions. A subscription is just the most economical way to play without those restrictions.

 

BTW, support in the past does not preclude the possibility of being, in your words, a "leech" in the future. As someone else pointed out, if you were a paying customer of a particular restaurant every week, and then stopped paying, is that restaurant going to continue to feed you the same meal for FREE.