The fairness in Preferred Status, or lack thereof.

[VanorDM]

I would agree another tier could be in order for preferred who have spent X amount vs preferred who have spent the minimum $5.

 

That wouldn't be so bad. Another option would be $X every Y months like a subscription lite... But instead of being billed, you have to spend $X every Y months or get dropped to the standard preferred. Could be as low as say $5 every 2 months.

 

The whole point of the tiered system is to allow people to pay based on the level of access they want, but also so they can say they have at least $X coming in every month. It's a fine line to walk between giving preferred enough but not too much.

 

Some games do it better. I thought STO did a good job, a prefered player gets quite a lot, but there's enough stuff that's sub only that it was worth it to sub when I played. RIFT on the other hand does a bad job, there's almost no reason at all to sub to that game that I could see.

 

However some games are even more draconian than SWTOR. LotRO for example locks you out of 90% of the content if you're not a sub. Yes the main story is free, but you can't really level up with the main story, and so have to grind levels killing random stuff. Although they do offer the ability to buy the content for a given zone. So in LotRO you can effectively buy a lifetime subscription. But that does cost a fair amount.

[hadoken]

The subscription cost is low. The free to play/preferred aspect is a demo of the game. It is a subscription based game and always has been. The model works just fine.

 

It's actually even more. As a free player you get access to the entire core class stories, which is a significant amount of content. Most games that have a trial limit what you can play content wise, and not in the unique (and to an extent, draconian) way that SWTOR limits the free players (via the UI, cosmetic options, etc).

[LordArtemis]

So what you are saying is that one can not take observable data and come to an educated conclusion. The only way one can come to a conclusion is by being in the board room when the decision is made. Damn that is a convenient defense mechanism and in the face of such avoidance of the basic principles of reasoning.

 

I think I am more than capable of indicating the meaning of my statements. Not only that, I am a far bit more informed on my meanings than you would be Ghisallo.

 

What I am saying is self evident. If you are not involved or privy to direct knowledge you are speculating. That is a fact. It has been a fact for all time. AN EDUCATED GUESS IS CALLED A HYPOTHESIS FOR A REASON.

 

Naturally this does not preclude one from coming to a conclusion, nor does it mean the conclusions they arrive at are incorrect....only unproven.

 

I shouldn't have to explain this to you, and I am frankly surprised that giving your opinion is so seemingly offensive to your sensibilities....after all, if that opinion is so informed, and myself (and perhaps others) concede you could be right....that is not enough?

 

It has to be fact for your point to be valid? If that is the case you have already defeated yourself in this discussion Ghisallo.

 

Perhaps it is because it is important that others agree with you? Again, if that is the qualifier you seek you may find some frustration in that effort.

 

YOUR OPINION HAS VALUE, regardless of whether it is informed or not, qualitative or not, definitive or not. If it is logical, even if it contradicts other opinions, it has value to the discussion.

 

Stop selling yourself short.

 

Also if you note I did not say I was 100% definitely right What I said was based on the what the guy who was in the room said we can infer that there was definitely a sentiment where they wanted to reward those who are willing to the most money, to the point that they should not be referred to by what some would call a pejorative.

 

Sure, we can infer that. We can also infer that he wanted to convey that the term "whale" is pejorative, nothing more. We can actually infer quite a few things from that statement, both in context and without.

 

Then we look at the success of the model, which is counter to the alleged research you have yet to link.

 

Oh, we are going to go there. The research is all over my posts on this forum for the last 3 YEARS. As always, I do not have to prove anything to you, and you can accept or dismiss my conclusions as you wish.

 

Forum veterans on the other hand would likely be less likely to do so, as the information has been distributed and viewed many times so as to become common knowledge....but I give you points for attempting to discredit my opinion with hyperbole....though you may find it a frustrating course.

Mayhaps if you placed a single link to the research you alleged to exist we can continue. If not there is no point doing research, sharing links and then debating with someone who has routinely made claims with NO supporting evidence whatsoever. Especially since you do not know the definition of mere speculation...

 

As to your remaining hyperbole, like the silly block of text above...I will only say this.

 

I did enjoy our discussion. Hopefully in the future you will learn to give yourself a bit more credit, and perhaps not lean on the melodic folly so heavily. I expect very few if any are buying what you are selling Ghisallo...though I do feel, with perhaps more time here you could one day present a very challenging argument.

 

But for now I am disappointed. I look forward to seeing your skills improve in the future.

[Idoya]

Play Wildstar. Whilst its not this game, it does not content any outdated restrictive pay walls. SWTOR claims to be f2p but only is for 'story' to level 50. Everything else is locked behind a pay wall. Bioware can't see the link between low population and pay walls.

 

It's the only MMO that continues to lock content behind a pay wall.

 

EVE Online.

[Ghisallo]

I went back and re-read your OP, then the tone of my response - and all I can say is, whew...sorry about that. Some of the other threads have given me the mehs, but that isn't an excuse.

 

Anyway...heres the thing. Preferred you get with a short amount of sub, or a long term sub. How do you delineate between long and short contributors?

 

The subscription cost is low. The free to play/preferred aspect is a demo of the game. It is a subscription based game and always has been. The model works just fine.

 

Have a nice day, and sorry for the vitriol.

 

Pretty much this. If you go to ONE first run movie a month (including snacks) or buy Starbucks once a week for the same month you can EASILY afford the subscription.

 

I usually challenge players wh complain to do the following. log the hours you play a month then divide that buy the amount of a subscription. If you play 2 hours a week you paid, roughly .55 cents an hour for a one month subscription (it gets cheaper the longer your subscription duration). What other form of entertainment is that cheap and not arguably illegal or, at least, unethical?

[LordArtemis]

I don't feel that the F2P or preferred option is really a demo of the game. I do, however, think the subscription rate is ridiculously low considering how costs have likely skyrocketed over the last 10 years.

 

IMO if subscription costs matched cost of living it would sit somewhere around 40 dollars a month. Some folks credit WoW for keeping the cost where it is....as well as some other not so positive effects on the MMO market.

 

One could argue perhaps that F2P and game markets were needed just so some games could keep the lights on, considering the phenomenal operating costs involved.

[Meraxos]

The solution to this "problem" is obvious. Preferred is not meant to be a viable alternative to subscription play. It's meant to get you to re-subscribe.

This is flawed logic.

 

SWTOR takes a punitive approach and tries to pressure people to subscribe by making the FTP and Preferred status fairly miserable.

 

I think this is self-defeating and drives people away who don't want to subscribe now but would otherwise stay connected to the game if Preferred were more pleasant.

 

And remember that some players don't like subscriptions for a variety of reasons but are still willing to feed a fair amount of money into the cartel market.

[VanorDM]

I do, however, think the subscription rate is ridiculously low considering how costs have likely skyrocketed over the last 10 years.

 

Yeah if you just consider the rate of inflation, subs are way cheaper now than they were in 2000. Per the US Gov's inflation calculator, a $15 sub in 2000, should now cost $20.73.

 

For what it's worth... A $15 sub in 1913 would now cost $360.52... Not that there were a lot of MMO's to sub to back in 1913.

[VanorDM]

This is flawed logic.

 

How so? What exactly is flawed in that logic? Because every MMO uses the same logic more or less. They offer more to subscribers then the F2P types with the intention of getting them to subscribe to the game. They also offer cash shop items as a way to generate more revenue.

 

So no there isn't any flaw in the logic. Offer more to people who subscribe then those who don't.

 

I think this is self-defeating and drives people away who don't want to subscribe now but would otherwise stay connected to the game if Preferred were more pleasant.

 

Sure there are likely some people who quit playing rather than play as preferred. But without some sort of %'s that's a meaningless fact.

 

Unless you can show that the amount of revenue would increase by making preferred more pleasant than there is really no reason for Bioware to do so.

[hadoken]

This is flawed logic.

 

SWTOR takes a punitive approach and tries to pressure people to subscribe by making the FTP and Preferred status fairly miserable.

 

I think this is self-defeating and drives people away who don't want to subscribe now but would otherwise stay connected to the game if Preferred were more pleasant.

 

And remember that some players don't like subscriptions for a variety of reasons but are still willing to feed a fair amount of money into the cartel market.

 

The logic is actually quite sound. Your complete guesses in the rest of your post however, are not. What we do know of the system as it's been designed is that it's actually worked = the game has improved remarkably from a financial standpoint since implementing it. And again, they have said the majority of CM purchases come from subscribers so your final line seems to be irrelevant if it's even true.

[LordArtemis]

Yeah if you just consider the rate of inflation, subs are way cheaper now than they were in 2000. Per the US Gov's inflation calculator, a $15 sub in 2000, should now cost $20.73.

 

For what it's worth... A $15 sub in 1913 would now cost $360.52... Not that there were a lot of MMO's to sub to back in 1913.

 

Yea, I might have inflated it a bit too much.

 

My first full time MMO was UO. Back then I paid 10 bucks a month. It is incredible to me that in 18 years the price has only gone up 5 bucks to play an MMO.

 

God. I just realized I have been playing MMOs for 18 years.

[DarthMaulUK]

Yes, the poor victim is what you've been portraying yourself as all along. We get it.

 

Stop being such an arse. Seriously. The FEW subscribers left in this game always throw their toys out of their pram when someone brings up F2P.

 

Get a grip and dismount from your high horse.

[hadoken]

Stop being such an arse. Seriously. The FEW subscribers left in this game always throw their toys out of their pram when someone brings up F2P.

 

Get a grip and dismount from your high horse.

 

And associate with the rabble? Why ever would I wish to do such a thing?

[VanorDM]

The FEW subscribers left in this game always throw their toys out of their pram when someone brings up F2P.

 

Exactly how few subscribers are there left then? I mean if you're going to make that kind of claim then back it up with something... Otherwise you're just spewing BS.

[DarthMaulUK]

Exactly how few subscribers are there left then? I mean if you're going to make that kind of claim then back it up with something... Otherwise you're just spewing BS.

 

They don't mention subs any more because its so tiny. But you can attempt to read this from EAs last financial report citing a drop in revenue and how subs have not risen since 2012 just after 1.7 million left the game.

 

But ON topic....

[dlcman]

They don't mention subs any more because its so tiny. But you can attempt to read this from EAs last financial report citing a drop in revenue and how subs have not risen since 2012 just after 1.7 million left the game.

 

But ON topic....

 

Can you post something with some real numbers in it? I ask because I think it is misleading to use that as a source for subs today. It more a history of swtor in an article on why to invest in ea.

Edited November 10, 2015 by dlcman

[branmakmuffin]

This is flawed logic.

 

SWTOR takes a punitive approach and tries to pressure people to subscribe by making the FTP and Preferred status fairly miserable.

It's a game. I guarantee anyone playing it is not miserable. If they were, they would stop playing it and go do something else.

 

I think this is self-defeating and drives people away who don't want to subscribe now but would otherwise stay connected to the game if Preferred were more pleasant.

What benefit to Preferred staying "connected to the game" if they don't subscribe?

 

And remember that some players don't like subscriptions for a variety of reasons but are still willing to feed a fair amount of money into the cartel market.

BS.

[Ybini]

Something that might help you stick with your sub is knowing its only 50c a day in cost. That's like buying a single cheap soda every day, just skip the soda.

[JessieLoverRxE]

Do you like having a decent amount of credits so you can buy cool new gear, mounts etc? Well you can forget about it with the preffered status because your level cap is 350k and if you rightfully earn anything more then that, it will be stocked into your escrow, completly unavailable until you subcribe - or spend cc's to get 50 or 200k out of there. Keep in mind you still cant even have more then 350 on you though.

 

 

I too find this restriction unfair because it takes away something a player has earned even while not getting the way higher amount of loot, discounts etc as a sub does.

 

Pref is actually already pretty limited with that + no companion customazatio (unless bought with cc's they don't have) , no artifical gear (again, unless they have/ buy with cc's), warzone restriction, no ops .... it is way closer to f2p then a sub.

 

Also you can't even send money by mail I think. Ik you can still send mail as pref, but I think you're just able to attach one item and no cash.

Edited November 10, 2015 by JessieLoverRxE

[TurtlesAWD]

 

BS.

 

I refuse to believe you're not familiar with the success of free to play games that sell primarily cosmetic items and don't have a subscription. It's like the single biggest model in recent game history, and there is a reason games keep doing it.

 

If you're truly not familiar with it or really don't think the success of that model could apply to this game, that's fine too, in fact I have some land in florida to sell you. Or maybe you would be interested in owning a bridge?

[Anaesha]

I refuse to believe you're not familiar with the success of free to play games that sell primarily cosmetic items and don't have a subscription. It's like the single biggest model in recent game history, and there is a reason games keep doing it.

 

If you're truly not familiar with it or really don't think the success of that model could apply to this game, that's fine too, in fact I have some land in florida to sell you. Or maybe you would be interested in owning a bridge?

 

OK but in my experience with fully f2p games the ones that start out selling nothing but purely cosmetic items rarely stay the course. Eventually they add an item the give players an advantage and it sells really well so they add another then another and pretty soon the cash shop is full of P2W items.

Edited November 10, 2015 by Anaesha

[JessieLoverRxE]

Okay, so the thing that's really, really unfair is the credit cap. Subs should get cool stuff for being subs of course (500cc's a month, higher item sales, discounts etc), but the credit cap has to go or at least not be so limited.

 

I am a sub (using 60 days pre-paid), and I'll sub back a bunch of times after this expires (cuz cc's, kotfe, easy in-game cash, unlocks etc). But yeah, still unfair people get denayed of something they worked way harder to get the we did.

[thebobmaster]

Do you like having a decent amount of credits so you can buy cool new gear, mounts etc? Well you can forget about it with the preffered status because your level cap is 350k and if you rightfully earn anything more then that, it will be stocked into your escrow, completly unavailable until you subcribe - or spend cc's to get 50 or 200k out of there. Keep in mind you still cant even have more then 350 on you though.

.

 

Actually, you can get over the 350K limit with an escrow, provided you have enough in escrow to do so with whatever escrow unlock you have. Plus, escrow unlocks are commonly available on the GTN, albeit for rather high prices. Not saying that the 350K limit isn't annoying. Just correcting misinformation.

[VanorDM]

I too find this restriction unfair

 

It's not unfair, it's not in anyway unfair. It's a restriction that is well documented and easy to remove. So there is nothing unfair about it.

Edited November 10, 2015 by VanorDM

[TurtlesAWD]

OK but in my experience with fully f2p games the ones that start out selling nothing but purely cosmetic items rarely stay the course. Eventually they add an item the give players an advantage and it sells really well so they add another then another and pretty soon the cash shop is full of P2W items.

 

This can happen, but some, like mobas, never need to sell items which provide an advantage (this would undercut the whole esports scene thing they had going on if they did) and some games even go the other way where cosmetics are added later. Like hearthstone, which has recently added alternate hero portraits/dialogue which provide no additional cards or game advantage but still probably paid for themselves as a feature.