Sell Arma Rasa/HK-55 recovery mission for 2- 5$ on web as digital extension of Kotfe.

[DarthCasus]

It's hilarious how defensive 'certain' (unsurprisingly familiar names) people get over the idea of folks wanting to actually pay BW more money on top of other charges for content at all. "Mine! I was there when it was released, so screw you all!". Childish to say the least but it's also a reason people tend to avoid the forums. I see no problem with people paying for a bonus chapter. Just because BW hasn't done it before doesn't mean they can't step outside the box for once.

 

You sure don't see people rocking their Yellow-black founder crystals, dancing with their Party Jawas either. It's just senseless pettiness.

[Ratajack]

It's hilarious how defensive 'certain' (unsurprisingly familiar names) people get over the idea of folks wanting to actually pay BW more money on top of other charges for content at all. "Mine! I was there when it was released, so screw you all!". Childish to say the least but it's also a reason people tend to avoid the forums. I see no problem with people paying for a bonus chapter. Just because BW hasn't done it before doesn't mean they can't step outside the box for once.

 

You sure don't see people rocking their Yellow-black founder crystals, dancing with their Party Jawas either. It's just senseless pettiness.

 

It's hilarious how bent out of shape the "entitled, have to have it even though I KNOW I did NOT meet the requirements to have that SUBSCRIBER REWARD" crowd, and those that wish to enable that crowd, get over the idea that some people actually expect BW to hold true to the terms and conditions and the CLEARLY AND EXPLICITLY stated criteria to have access to those subscriber rewards contained within those terms and conditions.

 

"Just because BW has NEVER made ANY subscriber reward available again, by any means, doesn't mean they can't step outside the box if we pester, whine, cry, beg, plead and clamor loud and long enough or throw a big enough temper tantrum."

[Transcendent]

Your are ignoring one VERY important fact.

 

Neither Treek nor the Section X authorization are subscriber rewards.

 

To date, the ONLY precedent that BW has set with regards to subscriber rewards is that they have never made them available again to those that did NOT meet the requirements to receive those rewards.

 

You are completely missing the point. Completely.

 

HK-51 is only available to subscribers. Literally. To get him as a non-subscriber (f2p or preferred) you have to pay to gain access to Section X to do the story / quest chain. That's the only way to get him as a non-subscriber. Pay.

 

That's one precedent of gaining access to subscriber only content.

 

Second one. Treek. To gain access to Treek as a non-subscriber you have to either buy a lot of escrow unlocks to go over the 350k limit for preferred players to then pay the 1m credits (iirc) to be able to get the mission to gain Treek. The alternative is to again pay to get the unlock directly off the Cartel Market. That is the only way to get him as a non-subscriber. Pay.

 

That's the second precedent covered.

 

So in essence, both Treek and HK-51 (plus the missions involved) are subscriber perks. You have to either be a subscriber to receive those for "free", or you have to pay.

 

Now, which part of paying to unlock additional content do you not understand from the above? That is essentially what I am suggesting BioWare do in respect to HK-55 and any related missions. Also bear in mind that someone has to PAY to be able to even get them, as they have to have been running KotFE as well, which, again, involves paying.

 

Not hard to understand those points is it? I guess I'll know if you come back with some witty remark or yet more excuses as to why BioWare should content lock these behind paying. Which is essentially what I'm also suggesting, paying. If you don't like that suggestion, I suggest you come back with a better reason than you have, because from my own viewpoint all I've seen is "but it's subscribers only stuff". Touch elitist.

 

EDIT: Oh, and before you come back with "you only suggest it because you want it". I don't. I hate HK-55, it's why I unsubscribed during KotFE - I didn't want all the HK-55 rubbish rewards (including the bonus chapter!). I still don't see why others who would like it, shouldn't be able to pay to gain access to it, at a reasonable price in line with the precedent set by BioWare already.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Transcendent

[Ratajack]

You are completely missing the point. Completely.

 

HK-51 is only available to subscribers. Literally. To get him as a non-subscriber (f2p or preferred) you have to pay to gain access to Section X to do the story / quest chain. That's the only way to get him as a non-subscriber. Pay.

 

Then HK-51 is NOT only available to subscribers, is he? That would mean that he is NOT a subscriber reward.

 

That's one precedent of gaining access to subscriber only content.

 

Second one. Treek. To gain access to Treek as a non-subscriber you have to either buy a lot of escrow unlocks to go over the 350k limit for preferred players to then pay the 1m credits (iirc) to be able to get the mission to gain Treek. The alternative is to again pay to get the unlock directly off the Cartel Market. That is the only way to get him as a non-subscriber. Pay.

 

That's the second precedent covered.

 

That would mean that Treek is NOT only available to subscribers. That would mean that Treek is NOT a subscriber perk, either.

 

So in essence, both Treek and HK-51 (plus the missions involved) are subscriber perks. You have to either be a subscriber to receive those for "free", or you have to pay.

 

Treek is NOT free, even to subscribers. She must be purchased, either with credits or CC's. She could not even be considered a "subscriber perk". Hk-51 requires that a player complete a quest chain and therefore is NOT a subscriber perk either, although you could say that section X authorization is a subscriber perk. A subscriber perk is NOT the same as a subscriber reward, though.

 

Now, which part of paying to unlock additional content do you not understand from the above? That is essentially what I am suggesting BioWare do in respect to HK-55 and any related missions. Also bear in mind that someone has to PAY to be able to even get them, as they have to have been running KotFE as well, which, again, involves paying.

 

Not hard to understand those points is it? I guess I'll know if you come back with some witty remark or yet more excuses as to why BioWare should content lock these behind paying. Which is essentially what I'm also suggesting, paying. If you don't like that suggestion, I suggest you come back with a better reason than you have, because from my own viewpoint all I've seen is "but it's subscribers only stuff". Touch elitist.

 

EDIT: Oh, and before you come back with "you only suggest it because you want it". I don't. I hate HK-55, it's why I unsubscribed during KotFE - I didn't want all the HK-55 rubbish rewards (including the bonus chapter!). I still don't see why others who would like it, shouldn't be able to pay to gain access to it, at a reasonable price in line with the precedent set by BioWare already.

 

What precedent set by BW?

 

Has BW EVER made ANY subscriber REWARD--not subscriber "perk", but subscriber REWARD-- available again?

 

No. BW has NEVER made ANY subscriber REWARD available again, by any means or at any price, no matter how loudly or how long the "entitled, have to have it even though I KNOW I did NOT meet the requirements to have that SUBSCRIBER REWARD" crowd, and those that wish to enable that crowd, pestered, whined, cried, clamored, begged and pleaded.

 

Neither of your two examples were even remotely close to being a subscriber REWARD.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Ratajack

[Monumenta]

Thats sad that EA calls it exclusive while bioware only calls it a bonus but, still, I think its obvious at this point in this thread which side is being polite and logical, lets hope the devs appreciate that. Edited September 18, 2016 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

I think its obvious at this point in this thread which side is being polite and logical, lets hope the devs appreciate that.

 

Keep hoping.

 

Let me know how that works out for you.

[Monumenta]

Keep hoping.

 

Let me know how that works out for you.

 

thank you for your support

[Tsetso]

I think its obvious at this point in this thread which side is being polite and logical, lets hope the devs appreciate that.

 

I haven't seen any impolite or illogical posts( unless someone quotes them )

[Transcendent]

Then HK-51 is NOT only available to subscribers, is he? That would mean that he is NOT a subscriber reward.

 

 

 

That would mean that Treek is NOT only available to subscribers. That would mean that Treek is NOT a subscriber perk, either.

 

 

 

Treek is NOT free, even to subscribers. She must be purchased, either with credits or CC's. She could not even be considered a "subscriber perk". Hk-51 requires that a player complete a quest chain and therefore is NOT a subscriber perk either, although you could say that section X authorization is a subscriber perk. A subscriber perk is NOT the same as a subscriber reward, though.

 

 

 

What precedent set by BW?

 

Has BW EVER made ANY subscriber REWARD--not subscriber "perk", but subscriber REWARD-- available again?

 

No. BW has NEVER made ANY subscriber REWARD available again, by any means or at any price, no matter how loudly or how long the "entitled, have to have it even though I KNOW I did NOT meet the requirements to have that SUBSCRIBER REWARD" crowd, and those that wish to enable that crowd, pestered, whined, cried, clamored, begged and pleaded.

 

Neither of your two examples were even remotely close to being a subscriber REWARD

.

 

Zzzzzz. Now you're just arguing semantics because you have nothing. Hey, I know, if it appeases the "it's mine!" crowd, how about making it a timed embargo of 1 year from the launch of any content? On top of the cost?

 

 

Seriously Rat, you still are completely, com-plete-ly, missing the point that was being made about something that was subscriber only. The access to Section X and the HK-51 story / quest arc wasn't available straight away, so yes, it IS subscriber exclusive. Same as Treek IS subscriber exclusive unless you PAY.

 

Same as HK-55 and the chapter ARE subscriber exclusive. There is nothing aside from a timed release that differentiates them at all. Nothing. Give it up. You're just arguing semantics and you know it, because, as said already, you have nothing.

[Ratajack]

Zzzzzz. Now you're just arguing semantics because you have nothing. Hey, I know, if it appeases the "it's mine!" crowd, how about making it a timed embargo of 1 year from the launch of any content? On top of the cost?

 

 

Seriously Rat, you still are completely, com-plete-ly, missing the point that was being made about something that was subscriber only. The access to Section X and the HK-51 story / quest arc wasn't available straight away, so yes, it IS subscriber exclusive. Same as Treek IS subscriber exclusive unless you PAY.

 

Same as HK-55 and the chapter ARE subscriber exclusive. There is nothing aside from a timed release that differentiates them at all. Nothing. Give it up. You're just arguing semantics and you know it, because, as said already, you have nothing.

 

You're just ignoring the obvious truth that HK-51 and Treek are NOTHING remotely like a subscriber reward because you have NOTHING, no argument at all to prove any precedent set by BW with regards to making subscriber rewards available again to those who did NOT qualify to receive those rewards.

 

BTW, show me how to get TREEK simply by subscribing, without having to pay anything extra, no credits, no CC's.

 

If you cannot, then she is NOT a subscriber perk, is she?

Edited September 18, 2016 by Ratajack

[Soul_of_Flames]

Bonus content is always a bad idea.

 

I've been subbed since the game started and I don't like the idea that I get bonus playable content that others don't.

 

Subscriber content should come in the form of items, titles, abilities and other such prizes. But bonus content actually has the opposite effect: it is a restriction given to subs.

 

I say this about all games too, not just SWTOR. Games with DLC such as new maps have a negative impact on the player base because it divides the community. Granted, this chapter in SWTOR doesn't have that effect, it's merely the principle of the matter I'm getting at.

 

Playable content should always be kept available to everyone. HOW it is played is what is important.

 

To put it into this conversation: Everyone should have access to the chapter but only subs can play it a certain (better) way.

[Ratajack]

Bonus content is always a bad idea.

 

I've been subbed since the game started and I don't like the idea that I get bonus playable content that others don't.

 

Subscriber content should come in the form of items, titles, abilities and other such prizes. But bonus content actually has the opposite effect: it is a restriction given to subs.

 

I say this about all games too, not just SWTOR. Games with DLC such as new maps have a negative impact on the player base because it divides the community. Granted, this chapter in SWTOR doesn't have that effect, it's merely the principle of the matter I'm getting at.

 

Playable content should always be kept available to everyone. HOW it is played is what is important.

 

To put it into this conversation: Everyone should have access to the chapter but only subs can play it a certain (better) way.

 

That is your opinion. Some share your opinion and others do NOT.

 

IMO, there is nothing wrong with BONUS content.

 

The problem is NOT with the BONUS content. The problem is with people who cannot accept that someone else may have something they do not.

[Transcendent]

BTW, show me how to get TREEK simply by subscribing, without having to pay anything extra, no credits, no CC's.

 

If you cannot, then she is NOT a subscriber perk, is she?

 

Reading comprehension failure? Go read upwards.

 

Or, more succinctly;

 

- What is the credit cap for non-subscribers?

 

Which means only a subscriber can gain them for credits. Everyone else has to PAY. Stop grasping at straws. I'm not even going to bother to respond after this.

[Ratajack]

Reading comprehension failure? Go read upwards.

 

Or, more succinctly;

 

- What is the credit cap for non-subscribers?

 

Which means only a subscriber can gain them for credits. Everyone else has to PAY. Stop grasping at straws. I'm not even going to bother to respond after this.

 

You still have not shown how anyone can obtain Treek simply by subscribing, without having to pay anything extra in either credits or CC's.

 

As I said, Treek is NOT even a subscriber PERK. She must be purchased and ANYONE can purchase her, subscribers and NON-subscribers alike.

 

The fact that you refuse to (cannot) provide any evidence that a player can obtain Treek simply by subscribing--without having to pay anything extra, either in credits or CC's-- and won't even "bother to respond after this" proves that you KNOW that I am correct that Treek is NOT a subscriber reward yet refuse to admit it.

[Monumenta]

IMO, there is nothing wrong with BONUS content.

 

IMO, this is just your opinion and it's misguided.

 

You still have not shown how anyone can obtain Treek simply by subscribing, without having to pay anything extra in either credits or CC's.

 

As I said, Treek is NOT even a subscriber PERK. She must be purchased and ANYONE can purchase her, subscribers and NON-subscribers alike.

 

The fact that you refuse to (cannot) provide any evidence that a player can obtain Treek simply by subscribing--without having to pay anything extra, either in credits or CC's-- and won't even "bother to respond after this" proves that you KNOW that I am correct that Treek is NOT a subscriber reward yet refuse to admit it.

 

Show everyone where you have a point other than being rude to those who disagree with you or arguing against things nobody is saying.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

IMO, this is just your opinion and it's misguided.

 

 

 

 

Different than your opinion does NOT = misguided.

 

My opinion is no more misguided than is yours.

 

My opinion just happens to apparently align with BW's opinion regarding BONUS content.

[Monumenta]

Different than your opinion does NOT = misguided.

 

My opinion is no more misguided than is yours.

 

My opinion just happens to apparently align with BW's opinion regarding BONUS content.

 

Again you ignore the point and again you are only stating an opinion, you don't speak for bioware.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Monumenta

[Ratajack]

Different than your opinion does NOT = misguided.

 

My opinion is no more misguided than is yours.

 

My opinion just happens to apparently align with BW's opinion regarding BONUS content.

 

 

Again you ignore the point and again you are only stating an opinion, you don't speak for bioware.

 

In your zeal to personally attack me (I'm guessing for no reason other than having the audacity to disagree with you and ask BW to hold true to their terms and conditions) , you must have missed the word "APPARENTLY" which would indicate that I do NOT claim to speak for BW.

 

I only make the point that it SEEMS that BW's opinion matches my own, and I say that due to their history of keeping subcriber rewards exclusive to those who MET the criteria to receive those reward and keeping those holocron cubes available in packs only, as they were introduced. They have NOT changed the way those holocron cubes can be obtained, and seem perfectly fine leaving that BONUS content unavailable to some.

[Soul_of_Flames]

That is your opinion. Some share your opinion and others do NOT.

Pointless statement is pointless.

 

IMO, there is nothing wrong with BONUS content.

Read your own reply to the previous statement.

 

The problem is NOT with the BONUS content. The problem is with people who cannot accept that someone else may have something they do not.

That is completely derailing. The conversation you think you're having is that people want things they aren't entitled to get. The point I'm making is that that desire shouldn't be relevant.

 

Bonus content given to any small number of the player base, be it through promotions or paid DLC or w/e, is ALWAYS a bad idea in a multiplayer-specific game. Especially an MMO - games designed around player interaction. Well, if one player has bonus content and another player doesn't, then how are they expected to interact?

 

I call it a restriction because it is. Not on it's own, but now you have to deal with other people not having the content you have. You have to deal with picking and choosing people who are compatible with the content you have.

 

Granted, the content in this instance is single player content. I understand that. But, like I said before, it's the principle of the matter. Nip the problem in the bud before they start making bonus content that is truly detrimental to the player base.

[Ratajack]

Pointless statement is pointless.

 

 

Read your own reply to the previous statement.

 

 

That is completely derailing. The conversation you think you're having is that people want things they aren't entitled to get. The point I'm making is that that desire shouldn't be relevant.

 

Why not? That IS, after all, the entire crux of this matter--people wanting something they KNOW they are NOT entitled to have.

 

 

"OH NO!!!!! Johnny has something I don't and it's NOT FAIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Never mind that those terms and conditions CLEARLY AND EXPLICITLY set forth what I had to do to have what Johnny got, and I FAILED to meet those criteria. It's NOT FAIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I WANT THAT SHINY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

 

 

 

Bonus content given to any small number of the player base, be it through promotions or paid DLC or w/e, is ALWAYS a bad idea in a multiplayer-specific game. Especially an MMO - games designed around player interaction. Well, if one player has bonus content and another player doesn't, then how are they expected to interact?

 

I call it a restriction because it is. Not on it's own, but now you have to deal with other people not having the content you have. You have to deal with picking and choosing people who are compatible with the content you have.

 

Granted, the content in this instance is single player content. I understand that. But, like I said before, it's the principle of the matter. Nip the problem in the bud before they start making bonus content that is truly detrimental to the player base.

 

To date, BW has not released any BONUS content that has any bearing on the core game.

 

 

I hardly think that BONUS chapters that have NO bearing on the core game are detrimental to the game or the player base. I doubt we need to "nip anything in the bud" due to concerns about BONUS content being detrimental to the game.

 

The only "principle" here is Janey wanting something that Johnny has and that she KNOWS she is not entitled to have.

[Macmagotty]

Let us not lose sight of the fact that several times EA has announced the requirements for a bonus post facto. Not necessarily illegal, but certainly not fair to the player base. And there are hitches in the system, like changing your method of payment may unknowingly cause an interruption in service, such as switching from CC to PayPal, or vice versa. It is not a seamless system.

[Ratajack]

Let us not lose sight of the fact that several times EA has announced the requirements for a bonus post facto. Not necessarily illegal, but certainly not fair to the player base. And there are hitches in the system, like changing your method of payment may unknowingly cause an interruption in service, such as switching from CC to PayPal, or vice versa. It is not a seamless system.

 

If only there were a way to ensure that a subscription remained in effect, even if a payment type changed. It could maybe something like a pre-paid time card, that someone could purchase and apply to their account to ensure that their subscription continued.

[masterceil]

Access to Treek and HK-51 are perks of being a subscriber, not rewards for maintaining a subscription for a certain time. They are both more in line with being able to show your Legacy Title, wear Artifact gear, and run unlimited Operations than they are with getting access to HK-55 or its bonus chapter.

 

Let us not lose sight of the fact that several times EA has announced the requirements for a bonus post facto. Not necessarily illegal, but certainly not fair to the player base. And there are hitches in the system, like changing your method of payment may unknowingly cause an interruption in service, such as switching from CC to PayPal, or vice versa. It is not a seamless system.

 

EA has never stepped in and redistributed BioWare's subscriber rewards for this game, either. 'Hitches' in the system are not up for debate here - that's a conversation to have with a CS rep. Playing this game is entirely voluntary - if you don't like how BioWare runs this game or their promotions for it, feel free to walk away at any time.

[Kingsbount]

Reading comprehension failure? Go read upwards.

 

Or, more succinctly;

 

- What is the credit cap for non-subscribers?

 

Which means only a subscriber can gain them for credits. Everyone else has to PAY. Stop grasping at straws. I'm not even going to bother to respond after this.

 

Two words:

CREDIT. ESCROW.

 

Any NON-sub with enough time and effort can buy Treek or HK. Even both.

 

WHAT A TWIST!!!

[jauvtus]

Two words:

CREDIT. ESCROW.

 

Any NON-sub with enough time and effort can buy Treek or HK. Even both.

 

WHAT A TWIST!!!

 

I hope you are not trying to say Treek and HK-51 aren't sub REWARDS, otherwise his point would utterly fail. Shame on you

 

But really, ANYONE can get Treek or HK-51, just have a friend or guildmate buy them for you and you can repay it in 350k parts. Oh, you don't like that? Then support the game by subbing and buying CC! Oh, you don't want to pay real money for a video game? Then don't! But neither ask for the same treatment as those who do!

 

Since the start of the game, subs never received anything for their loyalty. Now that they do, ppl hate them for them having shinies and frame them like they ruin the game with their selfishness, forgetting the fact that these subs are the reason the game is still running in the first place.

Edited September 19, 2016 by jauvtus