BW: Raise the sub price and do the job right

[Calidge]

First disclaimer: I care nothing for the needs of F2P players; they are parasites riding on the coattails of subscribers.

 

This "expansion" is pathetic. IF (and only if) the reason is that there is inadequate funding to produce a quality game then the logical solution is to bump the sub prices. Subscribers are committed and, I suspect, largely price-insensitive. If you deliver compelling content there will be no issue.

 

Just do your jobs. Releasing garbage serves no one.

 

Signed,

 

A software engineer supporting customer revenue-bearing infrastructure who understands what it's like to provide no-excuses online services. Do better.

[Ai_no_Kishi]

IF (and only if) the reason is that there is inadequate funding to produce a quality game then the logical solution is to bump the sub prices. .

I don't think that's an issue. Game earning less money isn't the reason why, say, UI looks worse now. You could use this argument for the game story, but not for the :jawa_smile:amazing changes, which were introduced in this patch. I think that if such thing were to happen(a more expensive sub), it'd simply mean more earnings for EA, but not more investments into the game.

[Calidge]

The UI dumb-down makes support of mobile platforms easier. It is a budget issue.

[ShieldProtection]

First disclaimer: I care nothing for the needs of F2P players; they are parasites riding on the coattails of subscribers.

 

This "expansion" is pathetic. IF (and only if) the reason is that there is inadequate funding to produce a quality game then the logical solution is to bump the sub prices. Subscribers are committed and, I suspect, largely price-insensitive. If you deliver compelling content there will be no issue.

 

Just do your jobs. Releasing garbage serves no one.

 

Signed,

 

A software engineer supporting customer revenue-bearing infrastructure who understands what it's like to provide no-excuses online services. Do better.

 

You will need to edit that offensive words of yours. Soon.

[Calidge]

What are the offensive words?

[demotivator]

First disclaimer: I care nothing for the needs of F2P players; they are parasites riding on the coattails of subscribers.

 

This "expansion" is pathetic. IF (and only if) the reason is that there is inadequate funding to produce a quality game then the logical solution is to bump the sub prices. Subscribers are committed and, I suspect, largely price-insensitive. If you deliver compelling content there will be no issue.

 

Just do your jobs. Releasing garbage serves no one.

 

Signed,

 

A software engineer supporting customer revenue-bearing infrastructure who understands what it's like to provide no-excuses online services. Do better.

 

I personnally would not accept a higher sub for the promise of better content.

 

Deliver quality and my sub and fidelity will follow. Not the other way around.

[Calidge]

I respect the resistance to high sub prices. I'll just point out that sub prices haven't risen since launch and that inflation has eroded the actual amount of revenue they produce.

 

A business needs cash to produce product. If there isn't enough cash, the product is substandard. If you are unhappy with the product then there is a clear solution.

 

Now... if you were to question the ability of BW to productively capitalize on increased revenue... I wouldn't argue against that. But if you sincerely want a better game you need to give them the tools to produce one.

 

Just keep them honest.

 

I do believe the "devs" would do a better job if they could.

[Raansu]

Raising the sub prices would just go straight to EA. The problem is EA doesn't reinvest into the game. BioWare has a set budget that's the end of it and subscriptions are already a contentious subject in this day in age of entitled gamers thinking everything should be free.

[juliushorst]

Many people are considering dropping their sub as it is. Don't think rising it would make it right.

You know what would help? Not using money made by SWTOR to fund other projects, many of which are doomed to fail since inception.

[Calidge]

I'm a Bioware asskisser? That's some impressive mental gymnastics there. Well done.

[Severith]

I'd love a return to form for the video game industry, even with inflation and old style monetization.

 

As a functional adult, who happens to not live paycheck to paycheck, I wouldn't mind spending 100 bucks on a video game, and 50 dollars for an expansion every few years, on top of a sub fee. What I do mind is wasting my time playing games that I want to be good, but don't meet the bar for quality or fun.

 

If I was a still a kid, my opinion would be different, and if I was struggling to pay bills I probably wouldn't play video games nearly as much. But as an adult, with a decently healthy checking account, I want to buy an MMO worth sinking my teeth into. Money isn't nearly as big as an issue as TIME is. I can make money. I can't make time.

 

I remember spending 45 bucks for NES games back in the 80's. For 1988 to today, inflation alone calculates that at over 100 dollars in 2022. And those were games made by much smaller teams than AAA games today.

 

So what's the new modus operandi for the video game market? Death by a thousand cuts via predatory cash shops, and sub par products that don't provide lasting entertainment, only the flash and promise of being the next big thing. So who is to blame for that, exactly?

 

Marketing. Marketing, and upper management, following the Pied Piper of whaling to the destruction of your favorite genres and intellectual properties.

 

The best thing you can do, the only thing really, is that to continue to support the video game industry pick companies that are worth your time. And current Bioware/EA doesn't cut it.

[Calidge]

Hear hear.

[Floplag]

No, zero chance i pay more right now, none.

EA has all the money they need, the game is profitable, EA needs to stop neglecting it.

[Totemdancer]

Raising the sub prices would just go straight to EA. The problem is EA doesn't reinvest into the game. BioWare has a set budget that's the end of it and subscriptions are already a contentious subject in this day in age of entitled gamers thinking everything should be free.

 

Exactly what Raansu says. It’s not like the game doesn’t make any money. It’s that EA don’t reinvest it into the game.

 

Increasing the sub price would be dramatically detrimental to the game.

 

A better solution would be to move to a paid expansion model using most of money to fund the expansion instead of EA executive bonuses and shareholder dividends.

[arunav]

First disclaimer: I care nothing for the needs of F2P players; they are parasites riding on the coattails of subscribers.

 

This "expansion" is pathetic. IF (and only if) the reason is that there is inadequate funding to produce a quality game then the logical solution is to bump the sub prices. Subscribers are committed and, I suspect, largely price-insensitive. If you deliver compelling content there will be no issue.

 

Just do your jobs. Releasing garbage serves no one.

 

Signed,

 

A software engineer supporting customer revenue-bearing infrastructure who understands what it's like to provide no-excuses online services. Do better.

 

Honestly, some of the changes seem to be bad on purpose. Like the team didn't want to do something they were being forced into with the game, and released a bad product on purpose.

[Totemdancer]

To all the F2P people I've offended:

 

Why are you NOT parasites?

 

Looking forward to informed, rational explanations.

 

Explain how you expect them to answer you when free to play and preferred players can’t post on the forums

 

Looking forward to an informed and rational explanation on how they can do that

[joshuadyal]

I'd love a return to form for the video game industry, even with inflation and old style monetization.

I consider old style monetization that you buy a game for 50-70 bucks, or whatever inflation says that price should be today, and then you've got it and you play it. You may get patches and updates and expansions, but you don't have to be connected to a server, you don't have to make microtransactions, and you don't have to have a subscription all just to play. More KOTOR and less GTA Online. That's a business model that I liked.

The best thing you can do, the only thing really, is that to continue to support the video game industry pick companies that are worth your time. And current Bioware/EA doesn't cut it.

Pray tell, which AAA corporations do you think DO cut it? Because from my perspective customer service and customer satisfaction with product is something that corporations feel is incredibly outdated. Courting investment, cashing in executive officer paychecks, and then running off to the next big opportunity to leave the lower level grunts to clean up the mess is how they're ALL run regardless of industry. I mean, are we suggested that ... who, Rockstar is better? I played a lot of Red Dead Online before coming back to SWTOR. It's not. It's got the exact same complaints for the exact same kind of behavior. Naughty Dog? If you want a good laugh of schadenfreude, look up all of the stories about Last of Us 2.

 

Someone upthread suggested that F2P players were parasites. From my perspective, it's the management caste that are like locusts, devouring and destroying one corporation after another, getting big paychecks and pats on the back and offers to come to the same thing to other corporations. It's the customers who are always holding the bag, as well as the honest, regular day-to-day workers.

Edited February 17, 2022 by joshuadyal

[JattaGin]

You will need to edit that offensive words of yours. Soon.

 

Sounds to me like you're threatening the OP. You might want to edit your post. You give some aggressive vibes.

[illgot]

First disclaimer: I care nothing for the needs of F2P players; they are parasites riding on the coattails of subscribers.

This "expansion" is pathetic. IF (and only if) the reason is that there is inadequate funding to produce a quality game then the logical solution is to bump the sub prices. Subscribers are committed and, I suspect, largely price-insensitive. If you deliver compelling content there will be no issue.

 

Just do your jobs. Releasing garbage serves no one.

 

Signed,

 

A software engineer supporting customer revenue-bearing infrastructure who understands what it's like to provide no-excuses online services. Do better.

 

F2P players keep this game active. These players sell items on the GTN, buy (or bought, inflation hasn't been kind to their 1 million credit limit) items from players, they take part in PvP and Operations, and keep chat going. They even buy items from the Cartel Market.

 

F2P players help keep this game alive and you thinking they are parasites or that you are better than them is immature and insulting.

 

You also do not seem to realize that the Cartel Market is the only reason this game still exists. The vast majority of the revenue doesn't come from subscriptions and raising it may cause more harm than good considering AAA MMOs are going FTP from launch knowing they can attract more players and generate more revenue than restricting their gameplay with subscriptions.

Edited February 17, 2022 by illgot

[Raansu]

F2P players keep this game active. These players sell items on the GTN, buy (or bought, inflation hasn't been kind to their 1 million credit limit) items from players, they take part in PvP and Operations, and keep chat going. They even buy items from the Cartel Market.

 

F2P players help keep this game alive and you thinking they are parasites or that you are better than them is immature and insulting.

 

You also do not seem to realize that the Cartel Market is the only reason this game still exists. The vast majority of the revenue doesn't come from subscriptions and raising it may cause more harm than good considering AAA MMOs are going FTP from launch knowing they can attract more players and generate more revenue than restricting their gameplay with subscriptions.

 

F2P players cannot do operations and they have limited pvp access and chat access. The only thing F2P players honestly keep active are the starter planets because the large majority of them come in, try the game and bounce out.

 

Also F2P means nothing if your game is a mess and lacks content * looks over at Halo Infinite *

[Totemdancer]

F2P players cannot do operations and they have limited pvp access and chat access. The only thing F2P players honestly keep active are the starter planets because the large majority of them come in, try the game and bounce out.

 

Also F2P means nothing if your game is a mess and lacks content * looks over at Halo Infinite *

 

Seems Bioware have also Nerfed some of the previous “preferred player” options with 7.0. Things I’d opened up or prepared to go preferred are now asking for excessive amounts of CC again to open up or get access to.

 

I had preferred boosters in storage on each toon I got from referrals and they’ve mostly disappeared completely from my inventory and the ones remaining are missing some of the unlocks when you open them.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Totemdancer

[Severith]

I consider old style monetization that you buy a game for 50-70 bucks, or whatever inflation says that price should be today, and then you've got it and you play it. You may get patches and updates and expansions, but you don't have to be connected to a server, you don't have to make microtransactions, and you don't have to have a subscription all just to play. More KOTOR and less GTA Online. That's a business model that I liked.

 

Pray tell, which AAA corporations do you think DO cut it? Because from my perspective customer service and customer satisfaction with product is something that corporations feel is incredibly outdated. Courting investment, cashing in executive officer paychecks, and then running off to the next big opportunity to leave the lower level grunts to clean up the mess is how they're ALL run regardless of industry. I mean, are we suggested that ... who, Rockstar is better? I played a lot of Red Dead Online before coming back to SWTOR. It's not. It's got the exact same complaints for the exact same kind of behavior. Naughty Dog? If you want a good laugh of schadenfreude, look up all of the stories about Last of Us 2.

 

Someone upthread suggested that F2P players were parasites. From my perspective, it's the management caste that are like locusts, devouring and destroying one corporation after another, getting big paychecks and pats on the back and offers to come to the same thing to other corporations. It's the customers who are always holding the bag, as well as the honest, regular day-to-day workers.

 

I said to pick companies that were worth your time, not AAA companies that were worth your time. Off the top of my head, I'd say Square Enix and Nintendo still take responsibility for their products, but that's a different culture. To find that from a western developer, you have to look at smaller studios or indie developers. To change anything, you'd need a AAA developer that isn't publicly traded, and without that as a foundation games will always be at the mercy of quarterly profits instead of long term profits.

 

I don't think of F2P players as parasites. They're flotsam. Incidental passengers inevitably scooped up during whaling expeditions. Background marionettes, giving the illusion of vitality. Low hanging fruit for the ego of paying players to compare themselves to. Not harmful, just a symptom of harm being done.

 

Cyberpunk just got a pretty huge update, it's probably a day late and a dollar short for most people, but it does more or less follow that old style-single player, single pay situation you're looking for. In 2 or 3 years it might actually be a pretty sweet game.

[Calidge]

Explain how you expect them to answer you when free to play and preferred players can’t post on the forums

 

 

Okay, good point. I wasn't aware of that.

 

Clearly, I've not been a F2P customer.

[Calidge]

F2P players help keep this game alive and you thinking they are parasites or that you are better than them is immature and insulting..

 

If F2P keeps the game going, then the game should just shut down.

 

If that thought is insulting... oh well.

 

You also do not seem to realize that the Cartel Market is the only reason this game still exists. The vast majority of the revenue doesn't come from subscriptions and raising it may cause more harm than good considering AAA MMOs are going FTP from launch knowing they can attract more players and generate more revenue than restricting their gameplay with subscriptions.

 

That's interesting, if true. What's the source of this information? Or is it just another internet factoid?

[illgot]

F2P players cannot do operations and they have limited pvp access and chat access. The only thing F2P players honestly keep active are the starter planets because the large majority of them come in, try the game and bounce out.

 

Also F2P means nothing if your game is a mess and lacks content * looks over at Halo Infinite *

 

did Bioware get ride of the operations tickets you could buy in the Cartel Market?