Jump to content

Please REMOVE SUBSCRIPTION Requirement for SWTOR


Anzel

Recommended Posts

SWTOR is now five years old and let's face it, it did not meet expectations. It never came close to achieving the success of WoW. Maybe it never could have, maybe the bar was set too high, maybe that's an unfair comparison. However, SWTOR was written, in part by Drew Karpyshyn, it had a massive budget, and it was developed by BWA. The expectations were high regardless of WoW or GW2 or STO or EVE, etc. etc. etc. We expected more from the BioWare pedigree and the Star Wars IP.

 

EA was quick to impose their version of the "Free to Play" model which really turned out to be a "Free to Gamble" model. Now they are expecting that we not only pay a monthly subscription but also continuously gamble gamble gamble in order to access the game's content. Want gear out of the Alliance Crates? GAMBLE GAMBLE GAMBLE. Want that shiny new toy from the advertisement email they sent you? You know, the one they posted on Twitter and Instagram? GAMBLE GAMBLE GAMBLE. Want that end game gear after grinding 70 levels? GAMBLE GAMBLE GAMBLE. Oh look, there's an event happening on Nar Shaddaa!!!! Guess what? Yep, you guessed it. GAMBLE GAMBLE GAMBLE.

 

Don't forget that a big chunk of us spent up to $115 on the game itself and then another $20 for each of the expansions. Surely this kind of loyalty and patronage will be rewarded right?

 

Meanwhile, games like League of Legends and Overwatch and Destiny are absolutely MURDELIZING SWTOR. What is the monthly subscription for League???? What is the monthly subscription for Overwatch? What is the monthly subscription for Destiny? You guessed it. ZERO. ZILCH. NUNCA. NADA. NOTHING.

 

What does SWTOR need to do in order to see populations explode?

 

1.) Drop the subscription fee. Period end of story. $15/mo is an outdated model and the days of games like WoW are well in the past. We know this because it's simply not working for SWTOR in its current state and games with other models are seeing massive success.

 

2.) Back off of the gambling. Make it optional. Add all of the Cartel items for direct purchase and let folks buy what they are interested in. Relying on a small group of pathetic gambling addicts for revenue is a terrible strategy.

 

As a five year old product, there is a TON of content. A TON of activities. A TON of potential for SWTOR. It's disgusting to see it all go to waste because of a few morons in suits who want to dig in their heels for fear that they could be proven wrong. Oh the humanity!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

*Unfortunately, EA wants constant sub revenue. So, any other model isn't likely to happen. Keeping people subbed is the entire point of the new gearing system. Keeping people subbed is the reason all of the end-game is now behind the sub wall. Someone at BW thought grinding on 2-5 year old content would keep people subbed. They thought a really long RNG grind would keep people subbed. From the look of server populations, they were wrong. How EA is going to take it in the next 2 or 3 quarters, I don't know, but I expect it won't be well. My hope is EA either gives the game to a different studio or they fire the management involved in SWTOR decision making and give it a chance to try for a comeback. My fear is EA will follow it's normal MO and just pull the plug.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

. Add all of the Cartel items for direct purchase and let folks buy what they are interested in.

 

This is appropriate, fair and logical.

 

As for the rest of it, a sub fee still makes sense to keep a game with this kind of overhead going, expansions coming and customer support being a thing. I agree that the FTP model was one of the worst (which is why I unsubbed when SWTOR went FTP), but the value to subscribers has gone way up since then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does SWTOR need to do in order to see populations explode?

 

1.) Drop the subscription fee. Period end of story. $15/mo is an outdated model and the days of games like WoW are well in the past. We know this because it's simply not working for SWTOR in its current state and games with other models are seeing massive success.

 

2.) Back off of the gambling. Make it optional. Add all of the Cartel items for direct purchase and let folks buy what they are interested in. Relying on a small group of pathetic gambling addicts for revenue is a terrible strategy.

So you basically want SWTOR to die?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is appropriate, fair and logical.

 

As for the rest of it, a sub fee still makes sense to keep a game with this kind of overhead going, expansions coming and customer support being a thing. I agree that the FTP model was one of the worst (which is why I unsubbed when SWTOR went FTP), but the value to subscribers has gone way up since then.

It is, and it isn't.

 

Putting items up for direct sale instead of in cartel packs would drastically decrease the amount of $$$ Bioware is making off the CM. Besides, then you'll have people whining that a mount or armor set costs $20 in the CM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is appropriate, fair and logical.

 

As for the rest of it, a sub fee still makes sense to keep a game with this kind of overhead going, expansions coming and customer support being a thing. I agree that the FTP model was one of the worst (which is why I unsubbed when SWTOR went FTP), but the value to subscribers has gone way up since then.

 

Destiny has had several incredible expansions. I purchased them all. The Rise of Iron expansion alone made more money than the original game did. Why is that? One, they don't require a subscription. Two, they don't rely on gambling.

 

https://gamerant.com/destiny-rise-iron-launch-month-sales/

 

Activision posted 1.57 BILLION dollars in Q3 2016 as "Overwatch Explodes". Again, NO subscription and they do NOT rely on gambling.

 

http://venturebeat.com/2016/11/03/activision-blizzard-generates-1-57-billion-in-q3-revenue-as-overwatch-explodes/

 

Battlefront... another Star Wars game... also from EA DESTROYED SWTOR. Again, no subscription, no dependency on gambling.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-electronic-arts-results-idUSKCN0Y12KE

 

etc. etc. etc. The subscription model is outdated. People will come play the game. People would buy items from the Cartel Market if they weren't forced to gamble. People want to play Star Wars. The players are out there. The revenue is out there. They are just out there playing other games, spending their money on other games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a reason why Swtor won "Worst MMORPG Business Model of 2016" and its partly due to the ridiculous restrictions placed on F2P and Preferred players. You're not really able to play this game without paying a subscription, its more like you're playing a beta version rather than the actual game.

 

Worst MMORPG Business Model of 2016

http://massivelyop.com/2016/12/16/massively-ops-best-of-2016-awards-worst-mmo-business-model-2016/

 

I don't think removing the subscription for this game is necessary, but they most certainly should remove or reduce the restrictions placed of F2P/Preferred. The subscription can stay, but instead of a subscription removing various restrictions on the game, they should instead focus on giving those with subscriptions bonuses like monthly rewards. The difference between F2P and Subscription shouldn't be a difference in restrictions but a difference in benefits.

Edited by Anduhar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is, and it isn't.

 

Putting items up for direct sale instead of in cartel packs would drastically decrease the amount of $$$ Bioware is making off the CM. Besides, then you'll have people whining that a mount or armor set costs $20 in the CM.

 

First, people who are buying gambling packs are people who love to gamble. They are buying them because of the very activity of gambling.

 

Second, I would make some items $200 instead of $20. Higher cost items would even further to incent the gamblers to keep gambling and I can guarantee you some folks would buy higher priced items just because they are higher priced. Cases In Piont: Starbucks, Tiffany and Co., BMW, Ralph Lauren

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a reason why Swtor won "Worst MMORPG Business Model OF 2016" and its partly due to the ridiculous restrictions placed on F2P and Preferred players. You're not really able to play this game without playing a subscription, its more like you're playing a beta version rather than the actual game.

 

Worst MMORPG Business Model OF 2016

http://massivelyop.com/2016/12/16/massively-ops-best-of-2016-awards-worst-mmo-business-model-2016/

 

I don't think removing the subscription for this game is necessary, but they most certainly should remove or reduce the restrictions placed of F2P/Preferred. The subscription can stay, but instead of a subscription removing various restrictions on the game, they should instead focus on giving those with subscriptions bonuses like monthly rewards. The difference between F2P and Subscription shouldn't be a difference in restrictions but a difference in benefits.

 

It's all a matter of perspective.

 

If Johnny perceives the subscription as removing restrictions, that is his perception.

 

My perception is the opposite. By subscribing, I get the PERKS of not having a credit cap, increased XP, additional character slots, etc.

 

Even if BW were to give the F2P and preferred players all of the current perks for subscribing and provide other perks for subscribers, the base perceptions of those players would remain.

 

Johnny who wants to claim he is currently being restricted if he does not subscribe will simply complain that he is being restricted because he doesn't get whatever new perks BW gives to subscribers.

 

Giving away the current store for FREE is not going to change those with a false sense of entitlement. The only thing that will change is the "restrictions" about which they complain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Activision posted 1.57 BILLION dollars in Q3 2016 as "Overwatch Explodes". Again, NO subscription and they do NOT rely on gambling.

 

First of all, comparing SWTOR, an aging MMO, to Overwatch, a state of the art, brand new first person shooter with competitive modes and the Blizzard secret sauce, is like comparing Dungeons and Dragons to the NFL. It's simply an unfair comparison. the only similarity is that they are both games.

 

Secondly, there IS gambling in Overwatch. Every time you buy a loot box, you take a gamble that you might or might not get that skin you want, and so people are spending money on an uncertain purchase. I know. I play it. And I have shelled out lots of cash to gamble in Overwatch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, people who are buying gambling packs are people who love to gamble. They are buying them because of the very activity of gambling.

 

Second, I would make some items $200 instead of $20. Higher cost items would even further to incent the gamblers to keep gambling and I can guarantee you some folks would buy higher priced items just because they are higher priced. Cases In Piont: Starbucks, Tiffany and Co., BMW, Ralph Lauren

 

If they were to do that, what if they made the direct purchase items real money and NOT CC's. There are far too many FREE CC's floating around out there.

 

CC's could be kept for things like packs, unlocks, etc. and the direct sale items, especially the really big ticket direct sale items, for real money.

 

 

How many people would be willing to pay $200 real money (not those thousands of FREE CC's they get per month for people clicking on their referral link) for Senya's Lightsaber pike? How about Revan's armor?

 

Do you think BW would increase its revenue or see a loss of revenue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange.....I did a Google search for "charity" and neither Bioware nor Electronic Arts came up!!!....Weird!!!!

 

Interesting... Here I googled some stuff as well.

 

DESTINY REVENUE

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Destiny+Revenue

 

OVERWATCH REVENUE

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Overwatch+Revenue

 

BATTLEFRONT REVENUE

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Battlefront+Revenue

 

LEAGUE OF LEGENDS REVENUE

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=league+of+legends+revenue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where EA is a publicly traded co, asking them to offer a free game won't happen, not very appealing in shareholder reports to see the word "free".

 

However, I would suggest they offer access to all content, but eliminate the rewards for free players that subs get.

 

This would dramatically increase pop-rates by allowing many more players into queue's, but also likely bolster subs via free advertising as the free players are able to see what they're missing.

 

Being able to sample this game free of charge is what converted me to a sub once I tried an Ops pass, now Ops passe are are gone, F2P players can't see what they're missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aww. Someone is mad that they have to pay actual money and not given everything for free!!

 

Expect he does not have to pay money and gets lot of stuff for free. He simply is against sub, as am i. Paying for this game is like buying new game every time. I am fine with buying new expansions, but i hate sub system. At the moment i find it worth the cost, but dunno about future, and i think i still prefer non-sub models.

Stop being a child, people who are against subs are not against paying for products you know. Paradox grand strategy games have massive DLC spam, and i have no problem of paying for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a reason why Swtor won "Worst MMORPG Business Model of 2016" and its partly due to the ridiculous restrictions placed on F2P and Preferred players. You're not really able to play this game without paying a subscription, its more like you're playing a beta version rather than the actual game.

 

Worst MMORPG Business Model of 2016

http://massivelyop.com/2016/12/16/massively-ops-best-of-2016-awards-worst-mmo-business-model-2016/

 

I don't think removing the subscription for this game is necessary, but they most certainly should remove or reduce the restrictions placed of F2P/Preferred. The subscription can stay, but instead of a subscription removing various restrictions on the game, they should instead focus on giving those with subscriptions bonuses like monthly rewards. The difference between F2P and Subscription shouldn't be a difference in restrictions but a difference in benefits.

 

 

It's all a matter of perspective.

 

If Johnny perceives the subscription as removing restrictions, that is his perception.

 

My perception is the opposite. By subscribing, I get the PERKS of not having a credit cap, increased XP, additional character slots, etc.

 

This isn't an entirely subjective matter based on a person's own perspective. There are objective facts to take into account here. The fact that F2P/Preferred does not have access to the Galactic Command system or Operations are, in fact, restrictions. This is actual game content that someone does not have access to. There are various other examples of this. Even the restrictions on things like the credit cap are, just that, restrictions. This is because they don't allow someone to effectively play the game the way it was originally intended to be played. A credit cap, specifically, does not allow someone to buy items off the GTN or vendors over a certain amount of credits.

 

Here's a link showing the differences with F2P, Preferred, and a Subscription:

https://www.reddit.com/r/swtor/wiki/f2p#wiki_differences_quickview

 

And yes, these are "restrictions" for F2P/Preferred. That is the term that literally everyone uses and the "perspective" that nearly everyone has.

 

Even if you compare this game to other MMOs, you'll come to the same conclusion that Swtor is incredibly restrictive with how it treats F2P/Preferred players. There are no other MMOs out there I can think of where the minimum player experience has arbitrary restrictions on things you do in the game, at least nowhere near the degree that Swtor does.

 

Even if BW were to give the F2P and preferred players all of the current perks for subscribing and provide other perks for subscribers, the base perceptions of those players would remain.

 

Johnny who wants to claim he is currently being restricted if he does not subscribe will simply complain that he is being restricted because he doesn't get whatever new perks BW gives to subscribers.

 

Giving away the current store for FREE is not going to change those with a false sense of entitlement. The only thing that will change is the "restrictions" about which they complain.

 

The differences between F2P/Preferred and a Subscription are significant differences that affect actual gameplay. Subscriber bonuses of the type they have done in the past with exclusive companions and the like do not affect gameplay. This is what I was suggesting in my previous post. Players should have a level playing field with regards to their ability to play the game. If BW wants to have Subscriptions then they can give perks that do not affect gameplay to those that have them. You cannot be restricted in your ability to play the game if everyone is able to play the game the same.

 

The idea that everyone would still feel restricted even when the restrictions are removed on F2P/Preferred is a slippery slope fallacy. And I believe your use of the phrase "false sense of entitlement" is just a way to belittle people for expressing their opinions on this issue. There are plenty of other MMOs that have ethical F2P models that are not dependent on placing ridiculous restrictions on the minimum gameplay experience. Someone's opinion that Swtor should follow suit does not mean they feel "entitled" to anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Expect he does not have to pay money and gets lot of stuff for free. He simply is against sub, as am i. Paying for this game is like buying new game every time. I am fine with buying new expansions, but i hate sub system. At the moment i find it worth the cost, but dunno about future, and i think i still prefer non-sub models.

Stop being a child, people who are against subs are not against paying for products you know. Paradox grand strategy games have massive DLC spam, and i have no problem of paying for them.

 

Ok. You are subbing now. BW is receiving $15/month from you Would you still find the sub "worth the cost" if they gave you everything for FREE--no credit cap, access to unlimited WZ's, FP's, OP's, CXP, etc?

 

I'm betting that no, you would not. After all, why buy the cow when you get the milk for FREE?

 

Now, how many other people do you think would still subscribe if they could get the whole game, with all the bells and whistles for FREE?

 

How much revenue do you expect BW would lose if they did as the OP "suggests"? How long do you think this game would continue if most, if not all, unsubscribed and BW lost all that recurring revenue?

 

BTW, IIRC, this is hardly the first thread the OP has created and/or posted in asking for MORE, if not the entire game, for FREE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*Unfortunately, EA wants constant sub revenue. So, any other model isn't likely to happen. Keeping people subbed is the entire point of the new gearing system. Keeping people subbed is the reason all of the end-game is now behind the sub wall.
Ironically, the new gearing system is why I'm not subbing anymore. Casinos don't make me want to gamble, and the new gearing system doesn't make me want to stick around for a new set. Another disappointing chapter in what should be an epic game, especially considering all the money and support it has/had.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't an entirely subjective matter based on a person's own perspective. There are objective facts to take into account here. The fact that F2P/Preferred does not have access to the Galactic Command system or Operations are, in fact, restrictions. This is actual game content that someone does not have access to. There are various other examples of this. Even the restrictions on things like the credit cap are, just that, restrictions. This is because they don't allow someone to effectively play the game the way it was originally intended to be played. A credit cap, specifically, does not allow someone to buy items off the GTN or vendors over a certain amount of credits.

 

Here's a link showing the differences with F2P, Preferred, and a Subscription:

https://www.reddit.com/r/swtor/wiki/f2p#wiki_differences_quickview

 

And yes, these are "restrictions" for F2P/Preferred. That is the term that literally everyone uses and the "perspective" that nearly everyone has.

 

Even if you compare this game to other MMOs, you'll come to the same conclusion that Swtor is incredibly restrictive with how it treats F2P/Preferred players. There are no other MMOs out there I can think of where the minimum player experience has arbitrary restrictions on things you do in the game, at least nowhere near the degree that Swtor does.

 

Maybe you should check out the most successful MMO out there, WoW. You can play WoW for free, but you have a level cap, gold cap, can't chat or whisper, can't join guilds, etc. You cannot access any of the expansions. That is actual game content to which those who choose to play for FREE do not have access.

 

If you drop from subscriber to "veteran status", you cannot even access any of your characters that over level 20.

 

It is vastly more restrictive than this game, but don't let a little thing like the truth get in the way.

 

In this game, you can play all of the class stories all the way through to the end of chapter 3, for FREE.

 

 

 

The differences between F2P/Preferred and a Subscription are significant differences that affect actual gameplay. Subscriber bonuses of the type they have done in the past with exclusive companions and the like do not affect gameplay. This is what I was suggesting in my previous post. Players should have a level playing field with regards to their ability to play the game. If BW wants to have Subscriptions then they can give perks that do not affect gameplay to those that have them. You cannot be restricted in your ability to play the game if everyone is able to play the game the same.

 

Subscriber bonuses like exclusive companions? Do you mean like the ones we ALREADY see multiple threads started by people complaining that they are being "punished" because they did NOT meet the criteria to have those companions and can't get them?

 

 

 

The idea that everyone would still feel restricted even when the restrictions are removed on F2P/Preferred is a slippery slope fallacy. And I believe your use of the phrase "false sense of entitlement" is just a way to belittle people for expressing their opinions on this issue. There are plenty of other MMOs that have ethical F2P models that are not dependent on placing ridiculous restrictions on the minimum gameplay experience. Someone's opinion that Swtor should follow suit does not mean they feel "entitled" to anything.

 

As I said, even if they were to add new perks for subscribers, the only thing that would change is the specific items people about which those choosing to play for FREE would cry, claiming to they were being "punished" by not being given those items or "restricted" from accessing.

 

You can dismiss it and try to call it a slippery slope if you wish, but we are already seeing the truth that is that slippery slope in action.

Edited by Ratajack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you should check out the most successful MMO out there, WoW. You can play WoW for free, but you have a level cap, gold cap, can't chat or whisper, can't join guilds, etc. You cannot access any of the expansions. That is actual game content to which those who choose to play for FREE do not have access.

 

If you drop from subscriber to "veteran status", you cannot even access any of your characters that over level 20.

 

It is vastly more restrictive than this game, but don't let a little thing like the truth get in the way.

 

As someone who plays WoW, you're simply misinformed. You're talking about the starter edition of World of Warcraft which has nothing to do with having an actual F2P model. The WoW Token system is how you actually play F2P with no restrictions whatsoever. You can make in-game gold and use it to buy WoW Tokens on the auction house that other people sell. WoW Tokens can redeemed for 30 days of game time, just like a subscription. There are no restrictions here and its not difficult to make the required gold to buy one each month. You can buy WoW Tokens yourself for $20 from their store and either use them or sell them. They also have plans to allow people to use the Tokens for other game services such as character transfers, etc.

 

Subscriber bonuses like exclusive companions? Do you mean like the ones we ALREADY see multiple threads started by people complaining that they are being "punished" because they did NOT meet the criteria to have those companions and can't get them?

 

As I said, even if they were to add new perks for subscribers, the only thing that would change is the specific items people about which those choosing to play for FREE would cry, claiming to they were being "punished" by not being given those items or "restricted" from accessing.

 

You can dismiss it and try to call it a slippery slope if you wish, but we are already seeing the truth that is that slippery slope in action.

 

Just because you see some threads with a few people who want the exclusive companions doesn't mean those beliefs are representative of the entire playerbase, or event he majority of it. Regardless of whether or not those people have a sound argument for making those companions acquirable again, they do not hold equal validity with complaints about the restrictions on F2P. One is talking about perks that do not affect gameplay and the other is talking about heavy restrictions on one's ability to play the game. You don't seem to grasping the fundamental difference between these two things.

 

But regardless, the complains about acquiring previously exclusive subscriber rewards can easily be dealt with by changing the way the subscriber rewards program works. Instead of granting rewards based on whether someone is subscribed by a certain date, they can have a program that grants rewards individually based on the number of months someone is subscribed, similar to how the referral program works. This would allow anyone to obtain the previously exclusive rewards as long as they stay subscribed for X number of months in total (not consecutively).

Edited by Anduhar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given this is EA we're looking at, how many of you expect to actually be able to afford to play a full-F2P SWTOR properly?

 

The way most F2P games work (and a F2P SWTOR would be no exception) is to make the game stupid grindy work to pay to get around. Except they already did this to CXP, so go figure.

Edited by ALaggyGrunt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given this is EA we're looking at, how many of you expect to actually be able to afford to play a full-F2P SWTOR properly?

 

The way most F2P games work (and a F2P SWTOR would be no exception) is to make the game stupid grindy work to pay to get around. Except they already did this to CXP, so go figure.

 

With the kind of money Disney and EA have on top of subs and CM sales, there's no reason why they can't make new content people actually want to spend time to play. Forcing people to spend their time by wasting it on gambling is profit-focused strategy ("the house always wins"). We need player-focused leadership. Profits are incidental to a product people actually want.

Edited by Troelsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...