Anyone else think....

[ShawDou]

Those are all possible ideas but without actual numbers we're just talking theory. If for example the amount of subs is up from before then the changes with 5.0 could be a result of them having more confidence in the sub model.

 

I do not know what the impact is or was of F2P but unless these people start spending real money on the game there isn't much to be had. So what's better for BWA? A F2P person who buys individual packs from subs or a F2P player who buys crates with real money and sells them to subs for credits and using escrow tokens to spend it?

 

Again I have no numbers but there are reasonable ideas behind both opinions and I have no actual idea what the truth is but it might be something that neither of us expected

 

Well my speculation has same value as yours. But when i look on fleet numbers (ppl on fleet) now and before 4.0. The difference is HUGE, as far as i remember.

 

There are a lot of articles about F2P games with micro-transaction models. A lot of them agree that most money come from only about few percent of biggest whales, who just pump a lot into the game. It does sound logical when you compare it to real world articles like "Richest 62 people as wealthy as half of world's population".

 

Rich ppl can pump huge money into games, while f2p can invest a lot of time into game to get credits to buy items they want. So Rich sell, f2p buy. I think packs was one of the best way to convert CC to credits. But after taking F2P and preferred out of equation. Rich dont have where to sell packs, so will not buy them as much as before.

 

BTW. When i was playing GTN before 4.0 i remember often seeing one person sell like 20 new hypercrates on GTN at the same time. Lately i never saw this anymore.

Edited October 23, 2016 by ShawDou

[Tsillah]

Well my speculation has same value as yours.

 

As long as reasonable, plausible arguments are brought forth, then yes.

 

But when i look on fleet numbers (ppl on fleet) now and before 4.0. The difference is HUGE, as far as i remember.

 

What do the number of people on the fleet have to do with anything? There may have been a drop in population, there may not have been in the last year but then MMOs have ups and downs anyway so changes are the numbers go up again. However, if it is true there are a lot of people doing more non group content then clearly they will not be on the fleet but on the leveling planets and funny enough I've seen an overall increase in population on the leveling planets. So did the population go down or did they just shift where they hang out?

 

I can't answer that question either with any certainty but to assume the server population is down because of the fleet is to big a leap for me. Opinions are fine and people are free to have as many as they want, but for them to have merit in a discussion I prefer they have a level of plausability.

 

The difference between you and me is that you believe it's going a certain way and I'm say I don't know because I can see it going a different way just as well and I don't have enough information to really make a fair statement. I am therefore not saying your opinion is false, but that the way you get to that conclusion is based on feelings and personal experience and not on real data or in other words, a guess.

[ShawDou]

As long as reasonable, plausible arguments are brought forth, then yes.

 

......

 

The difference between you and me is that you believe it's going a certain way and I'm say I don't know because I can see it going a different way just as well and I don't have enough information to really make a fair statement. I am therefore not saying your opinion is false, but that the way you get to that conclusion is based on feelings and personal experience and not on real data or in other words, a guess.

 

I agree that only time will tell if any of us is correct. But my arguments are based mostly on one thing. SWTOR tried to be SUB-based MMO driven by story on the beginning and failed hard. Only F2P model with micro-transactions saved it. That is FACT.

 

Rest is assumptions, but from latest events and their announcements, it think they are trying to do the same thing again. And i feel they will fail again. I do not want them to fail, this MMO is my most favorite but things looks too similar to me.

[Tsillah]

I agree that only time will tell if any of us is correct. But my arguments are based mostly on one thing. SWTOR tried to be SUB-based MMO driven by story on the beginning and failed hard. Only F2P model with micro-transactions saved it. That is FACT.

 

What people conclude from this mostly is not factual though.

 

It's not the lack of F2P or a CM that made it fail. There were other issues in the game. Bringing in F2P and the CM was a move that saved the game but it wasn't an improvement in my view and it wasn't the lack of that before that caused the original fall.

 

Facts are facts but be careful not to read things into the facts that are not actually factual is what I'm saying.

[LunaticFringer]

Well, I'm responding because I genuinely do not like RNG loot bags nor the gutting of a system that was finally streamlined itself and working very well. And I'm still subbing like an idiot even though they haven't added group content we've been asking for in over two years. IE... new FPs/OPs and not this Uprising stuff and regrind the game DvL mechanic they're running with.

 

They need their old team back, they need to quit spending millions per minute on trailers, and they need to quit trying to fix what isn't broken in game. And they need to actually hire some more Devs and push the content we do want in game and not the content they want us to want.

 

An mmorpg does not stand on story alone. Their fourth pillar. A mmorpg needs a multitude of things. Good crafting, good gearing mechanics, OPs, FPs (both called different things in different mmorpgs) and a very different approach to trying to get subs and limit F2P members.

 

Basically, I get that their hearts are in the right place... but this is just going about it all wrong and it won't be a good thing when we lose more players over it. And we are going to lose more players over it.

 

As far as offering critiquing advice rather than "I hate this"... I've been saying leave our current system alone. Add some Cartel Market items to their current Command Boxes, or new items altogether, and just tweak crafting to be on par with the end game gear. As for the sub/F2P members, a few games out there do reasonably grindy alternatives to allowing a F2P member eventually being able to play like a sub via unlocking systems. Star Trek Online is a good example but by no means the only one they could look at. And just those changes could change everyone's outlook on this new system.

 

As it stands now... we didn't ask for this change nor did we really want it. Yes, there are those of you that are fine with it but those of us that don't want it have a pretty good point too. The desire and incentive to do any particular content was just killed for several of us.

 

Don't NGE the game...

[ShawDou]

What people conclude from this mostly is not factual though.

 

It's not the lack of F2P or a CM that made it fail. There were other issues in the game. Bringing in F2P and the CM was a move that saved the game but it wasn't an improvement in my view and it wasn't the lack of that before that caused the original fall.

 

Facts are facts but be careful not to read things into the facts that are not actually factual is what I'm saying.

 

Well i said it failed because they wanted it to be SUB-based MMO driven by story. I believe that more group content and more PvP content together with creating bigger people base (that is where F2P helped) saved game. But they are now going back to SUB-based MMO driven by the story. The one style that failed on the beginning.

Edited October 23, 2016 by ShawDou

[Tsillah]

Well i said it failed because they wanted it to be SUB-based MMO driven by story. I know that more group content and more PvP also helped save game. But they are now going back to SUB-based MMO driven by the story.

 

You said it failed because they wanted it to be sub-based but that is the part that's not factual. Just because it was used to save it, doesn't mean it was the cause that made it fail. That's incorrect reasoning.

 

I was there at the start and the general feeling that existed after release is that the game was too buggy and had too little content for the long term. This translated then to people complaining that they didn't know what they were spending their 13 bucks a month on. So was it the lack of an F2P option that was the problem or was it that they rushed the game out too quickly with not enough content to keep people busy?

 

You say it's because it was sub based, I say it was because the game was rushed out and didn't live up to expectations. Neither of us can really know but I hope you're not saying that part of your view is fact because it's not: it's a belief.

[Andryah]

.....that the people doing so much complaining "on behalf of" preferred players being excluded, are actually wanting it put in so they can drop their subs and still get full access to the game? Or should I get my tinfoil hat re-tuned?

 

I'm sure that is not the entire reason, but yeah... some have actually been very transparent about it when they state in one thread that they have unsubbed, and then in another thread are plying the case for loosening Preferred restrictions.

 

And of course we have those that are working the cause for their "friends". Yeah, right.

 

The other facet is people who really only want to play one or two aspects of the game and insist these aspects should be given free and unrestricted access under Preferred.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Andryah

[IanArgent]

You said it failed because they wanted it to be sub-based but that is the part that's not factual. Just because it was used to save it, doesn't mean it was the cause that made it fail. That's incorrect reasoning.

 

I was there at the start and the general feeling that existed after release is that the game was too buggy and had too little content for the long term. This translated then to people complaining that they didn't know what they were spending their 13 bucks a month on. So was it the lack of an F2P option that was the problem or was it that they rushed the game out too quickly with not enough content to keep people busy?

 

You say it's because it was sub based, I say it was because the game was rushed out and didn't live up to expectations. Neither of us can really know but I hope you're not saying that part of your view is fact because it's not: it's a belief.

 

Well, while the level of content is debateable; the bugs we have seen in 4.0 have been related to either visuals (bad engine, no dark side cookies), or related to story flags (same answer as before). They are producing a pretty low-bug output right now.

[ShawDou]

You said it failed because they wanted it to be sub-based but that is the part that's not factual. Just because it was used to save it, doesn't mean it was the cause that made it fail. That's incorrect reasoning.

 

I was there at the start and the general feeling that existed after release is that the game was too buggy and had too little content for the long term. This translated then to people complaining that they didn't know what they were spending their 13 bucks a month on. So was it the lack of an F2P option that was the problem or was it that they rushed the game out too quickly with not enough content to keep people busy?

 

You say it's because it was sub based, I say it was because the game was rushed out and didn't live up to expectations. Neither of us can really know but I hope you're not saying that part of your view is fact because it's not: it's a belief.

 

Well looks like you agree with me on something, but disagree at same time.

 

Game had too little content for the long term = because it was experiment MMO driven by the STORY. You rush though story few times and you are done with it. No group content = no repeatability, so nothing to keep you subbed. And now they are going back to it.

[Tsillah]

Well looks like you agree with me on something, but disagree at same time.

 

Game had too little content for the long term = because it was experiment MMO driven by the STORY. You rush though story few times and you are done with it. No group content = no repeatability, so nothing to keep you subbed. And now they are going back to it.

 

I am not saying your opinion was wrong as such, but that it's a belief, not a fact. That may still mean it was true, but it's not a fact that can be proven or disproven by either of us.

 

Apparently BWA are seeing reasons to focus on subs, they already did so with 4.0 and this seems to be the next step. With all the things they've done I have to at least think there may be some reasons for them to believe it has a chance of success.

 

And as they said they are refocusing on group content again. Maybe not ops but group content nonetheless. Perhaps they feel group content needs a new format that they can see work. Guess we'll find out in January.

[ekwalizer]

Stuff like this makes me think most subs have little idea of the restrictions Preferred face, and how it impacts every level of your playing experience. Unlocks and passes can minimize some things but not everything. If GC is available to Preferred with the same system as we have today, they couldn't equip gear without the Artifact Authorization unlock... period. Any endgame level 65 gear is Artifact quality so there's your first price at level 70, unless they paid for an account wide unlock, they can get the gear but anything new they can't equip.

 

Mission rewards regarding containers are a nightmare to lose constantly, you have an XP penalty, you can't pay for character sheet unlocks above 350k, you can't expand your inventory or cargo bay with credits unless you're a sub, you have lower priority on loot rolls... and a lot of other issues like Conquest difficulties, lower reverse engineering chance, diminished reputation.

 

Any endgame activity like Ops or warzones requires a pass per character. Not per account, per character. Why do you think the highest ticket 'give Preferred/F2P this' is endgame activities or the credit cap.

 

It's not advantages, exactly- it's all the restrictions you lose. The CCs and rest experience, or any of the sub rewards would be the only clear positive advantages of a sub- the rest are a large list I can barely scratch the surface of. I don't mind it when people have a different viewpoint but this most recent debate because it's so divisive is really lighting up a lot of misinformation.

 

Like someone who thought Preferred were why Fleet chat is a dive. No, that would be subs- the main culprits can correct and argue too fast and without the consequences a Preferred or F2P player would face for that trash, they are always complaining about getting reported and a slap on the wrist.

 

I agree, throughout the lifespan of the game I dropped to preferred for one week .... it was unbearable. I even planned ahead and bought Headslot, toolbars, unify color, artifact (account), extra crew skills and many other unlocks. Needless to say I resubbed in short order.

[Khaleijo]

I'm sure that is not the entire reason, but yeah... some have actually been very transparent about it when they state in one thread that they have unsubbed, and then in another thread are plying the case for loosening Preferred restrictions.

 

And of course we have those that are working the cause for their "friends". Yeah, right.

 

The other facet is people who really only want to play one or two aspects of the game and insist these aspects should be given free and unrestricted access under Preferred.

 

How is paying for OPS passes or for warzone passes expecting "to be given for free" ?

 

Up to SOR and Ziost, i was interested in the whole game, occasionally PvP, GSF, the old stories, leveling new toons, FPs, i did everything now and then.

Since KOTFE i find the story weak and boring, full of plot holes and dumb forced endings, out of my 15 active played characters 2 did KOTFE. I want to play, not watch endless cutscenes and those skytroopes and corridors were nothing but artifical increasing the time spend without even trying to hide it.

The tactical FPs aren't nearly as much fun as the old trintiy system for me, HC FPs, well good luck getting DPS that do more than basic attacks with the new leveling experience. GSF, not patient enough anymore to wait for the pops, only to meet full equipped premades that just tear newer players apart. Either a sky high win or devastating defeat without a real chance. Not much fun. Levelsync together with the masses of XP you gain now took out any fun i had with leveling too.

What is left is enjoying the evenings, raiding with my guild and group.

 

As someone who raids most of the time spent ingame, I pay a sub for the game to access content that didn't get updates except of "scaling to level" for quite some time now. So as there weren't any news or better time frames than "we will likely talk about that in a few months" again, after the stalling tactics around the release of KOTFE, my sub lapses and i decided that to me, the game as it is, isn't worth the whole sub fee. There is no new stuff for my preferred playstyle again and again.

No outcry from anyone about that, here in the forum or at cantinas or anywhere helped, so i'm deciding with my wallet now. What people always told to do if there was a thread about "where is new group content". So to speak my sub lapses on principle, to give feedback that i don't like where the game is headed. (By the way using game time cards, there is no way to give notice why you are stopping paying for a sub)

 

Before it was a viable option to keep playing, what you still liked about the game, (in my case raiding with my group) by investing some money into authorizations and passes. I planned to keep tabs on the game by doing so, until maybe there finally will be a clear answer, what the future of group content will be. Still playing together with my guys, but only paying only for what is left as interest in the game for me. > OPS passes

 

Now as there is a new levelcap i'm forced to buy the expansion or in case of this game, at least sub one month. Although there isn't anything new in the game that interests me. Personally i preferred the way when an expansion was to be bought extra and not part of the sub. But well, can't change that. But as OPS being the only thing i play, i was ready to pay for access to them by passes and unlocks after one month sub to get the new levelcap. (not freeloading)

 

Now this new GC system is forcing me to stay subbed and pay the full price for everthing and that with still no new group stuff that maybe would warrant to pay for it. The only new thing will be 5 more levels I don't really need and tedious RNG based grind to play the same old stuff again, that is rehashed for the third time now, in case of Asation even more often.

That just isn't worth a sub to me and *preferred + OPS passes* being excluded from effective playing OPS higher than SM will certainly not making me to sub again just like that.

As December is full of chrismas parties and going on holiday, time with the family and stuff, KOTET will start without me, at the moment I don't even know if I want it at all, because as preferred that i will be out of principle until there is new content that really interests me, it won't get me anything. I just can stay at 65 for the things i will be able to do at 70 as preferred.

More likely i will follow the rest of my guild members who left over the last year to other MMOs

 

Without a comeback in a few month probably, as I don't think KOTET story will have anything luring me back. It would have to be brilliant to get me interested again, as we more or less have a singleplayer game now with a chatsystem, the story has to keep up to real singleplayer RPGs, in my opinion it doesn't manage that now and won't in the future. Everyone talking about this is finally KOTOR 3, should really replay the old KOTOR games, those were never such a railroad without any replay value.

 

If there really is new 8 man group content in the making, in particular operations, it would have to be good because for meeh mechanics or one boss operations, why bother coming back?

 

Of course you could say "just leave", but i had a lot of fun with this game and hoped to go on having fun. As dropping sub seems to be the only way to make an impact ( just remember the companion incident at the beginning of this year, how fast they reacted after masses cancelling their subs, or at least saying to do so) i do exactly that.

If BW doesn't even wants my preferred money for passes anymore, well then not. I would have thought a little money would be better than none. But as it is, one player less to play group content with.

[Transcendent]

I'm sure that is not the entire reason, but yeah... some have actually been very transparent about it when they state in one thread that they have unsubbed, and then in another thread are plying the case for loosening Preferred restrictions.

 

And of course we have those that are working the cause for their "friends". Yeah, right.

 

The other facet is people who really only want to play one or two aspects of the game and insist these aspects should be given free and unrestricted access under Preferred.

 

Well, I'm still a subscriber, who likely wouldn't even play the game as a pref. (I logged a couple of times during my break from the game and found I still had no interest in it). I do however think pref. players should be altered in some form, such as removing the "spend $5 in the CM to become pref.", and then only have pref. as previous subscribers who are no longer subscribing (for whatever reasons).

 

Then relax some of the participation lockouts a touch. Such as being limited on how many matches of PvP, or being able to do group content of any form. If needs must, include an account wide lockout timer, where once the player has played, for discussions sake 3 hours for the week, they can no longer login to the game.

 

I really think that BioWare need to look slightly outside the box, if they produced more frequent content updates instead of just recycling old content that should be reason enough to subscribe to play the game. People need to want to play the game first, that means "new content".

 

As it is, I think with the films generating interest, people who have been playing this game for a length of time are no longer the target audience to this game. BioWare are aiming directly at those transient casual "facebook" players with everything that they're changing with the last two "expansion cycles". Everything they do, from communication, through other parts and the general impression they give, is that they are not after the atypical "MMO" gamer.

 

Pay to win will be next on the list.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Transcendent

[AllisonLightning]

I'm sure that is not the entire reason, but yeah... some have actually been very transparent about it when they state in one thread that they have unsubbed, and then in another thread are plying the case for loosening Preferred restrictions.

 

And of course we have those that are working the cause for their "friends". Yeah, right.

 

The other facet is people who really only want to play one or two aspects of the game and insist these aspects should be given free and unrestricted access under Preferred.

 

The reason there are extra people fighting this than otherwise would be is because the 5.0 tweak under the guise of Galactic Command (and turning gearing into stringed out content) outright denies those Preferred who get access to the expansion, passes and an Artifact Unlock endgame gear when they can do it now under 4.0.

 

Yes, there are some really bad arguments but it's on both sides. People think Preferred can do some things they just can't (I started to play again heavily before I re-subbed in June and I was that Preferred player in a landscape with mostly F2P or subs).

 

I think the game needs the current status quo and I'm deeply worried about the removal of the passes. Either, it's to make way for some demented Galactic Command pass and re-brandings of the current passes or we're going to see a change that upsets a group of subs. When I say that we can't afford to lose the Preferred who are still playing, we also can't afford to lose the subs who would either get upset by Preferred/F2P complete access of warzones, operations and such or who are the rampaging hypocrites who would quit paying a sub the second they could.

 

That's because, to put it quite bluntly- lack of appropriate gear wouldn't bother them the way it does the Preferred who did spend the extra on passes and Artifact gear unlocks.

 

As for the general direction of what they're aiming for, it's all conjecture- especially since they removed the passes without warning.

[JohnnyGunman]

Regardless of how people feel about the morality of preferred players, the reality is they are necessary for the game to live. A friend of mine spent about $50 on buying things for preferred players, art auth, wz passes, ops passes. They are happy to spend money on the game while the preferred player prefers to only sub once or twice a year. Some income is better than no income right?

 

If preferred players are locked out of the endgame, it will be the end of the game. There simply aren't enough subs to keep the queues popping, what with the new system and all. Sure the server will still be up and people can play the solo content, but there won't really be any meaningful group activities going on.

 

Perhaps they are replacing the old passes with a new pass.