Belladoni Posted July 16, 2023 Posted July 16, 2023 If you are going to be the same company, EA should quit charging $12.99 a month for a TWENTY-SIX year old game. At the least, SWTOR players should get free full access included in our monthly costs. This might drive more business to that ancient game and get new players going. At the least, it should have been free full access decades ago.
FlameYOL Posted July 17, 2023 Posted July 17, 2023 I don't feel the need to have access to Ultimate Online, I pay for my SWTOR subscription and that's it.
LD_Little_Dragon Posted July 17, 2023 Posted July 17, 2023 Why? Same company but different games. There's no reason to bundle them except you don't want to pay for each game. Broadsword is not not a charity, it's a business. Want to play a game? Pay for that game. 1
Tantala Posted July 22, 2023 Posted July 22, 2023 Each game needs to generate its own revenue stream otherwise a less popular game can drain resource from a more popular one. However, there is no reason why a bundled subscription (XX% off if you subscribe to more than one game) could not be used as an incentive.
FlameYOL Posted July 23, 2023 Posted July 23, 2023 On 7/22/2023 at 9:32 AM, Tantala said: Each game needs to generate its own revenue stream otherwise a less popular game can drain resource from a more popular one. However, there is no reason why a bundled subscription (XX% off if you subscribe to more than one game) could not be used as an incentive. Even with that in mind I'm not sure either Ultimate: Online or Dark Age of Camelot offer an MMO experience that SWTOR players would want, or vice-versa.
Kristallia Posted July 23, 2023 Posted July 23, 2023 I think some little campaign could possibly make sense if it would make some players to try ultima online for example, but im not sure how financially sustainable would it be if they would just give free access to all swtor players.
Recommended Posts