| 148 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
superniceguy
Elite Member
Joined: 2/17/07
NGE > NGE 2, LOTRO > NGE 2, STO > NGE 2, KOTOR > NGE 2, Lego Star Wars > NGE 2. NGE 2 = SWTOR |
11/21/12 6:58:07 PM#21
Overall all F2P games should concentrate on content, and items be obtainable through playing quests but devs too lazy to do so (SWTOR is no exception to this but will be even more so), or even an in game vendor using in game currency, instead of spending more RL currency. Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012 |
Originally posted by lizardbones When I say F2P players have no right to complain, since they're getting a product for free, I don't mean that things can't be improved. That's not really directed at you, just stating that out front, so people know that I don't think things are perfect or anything. With that said, I agree with some of your points. 1. The UI restrictions are unusual and a bad move on Biowares part. I'm a subscriber at lvl 18 right now, and I'm already using 4 hotbars. Not full mind you, but for seperating buffs, from actives, mounts, consumables etc. 2. I agree about the character slots.
|
|
|
11/21/12 7:02:30 PM#23
Originally posted by kevjards The problem with this is TOR really has a very short window of time. For the most part LOTRO made changes around the margins. People were mostly satisfied with the original concept. Here there are very few on any side happy with the way this went down. They need immediate cash infusions for this game to flourish. They aren't going to get it. And the longer you go, the less relevant you become. The less relevant you become, the ability to appeal to people declines. Really sort of is a downward spiral there's no easy way out from. |
|
Originally posted by Ridelynn That's my main worry for this game. I do enjoy the class stories and the group conversations, but it doesn't seem like they're developing the game enough for subscribers to stay subscribed after they exhuast the content. I wonder whatever happened to having constant updates to the class stories and etc? |
|
Originally posted by Deewe I agree |
|
|
11/21/12 7:08:42 PM#26
Originally posted by nate1980 Budgetary realities. They didn't go F2P because it would lead to expanded profits. They went F2P as a last chance at breaking even. That stuff might come later, but only once they recoup their investment and offer a sensible return to their investors. |
|
|
11/21/12 7:09:32 PM#27
I think a major issue that's brought up a lot of the hate would be them charging for quickslot bars. I have never seen a company charge for a UI element before. It's just absurd.
|
|
|
11/22/12 2:28:59 AM#28
Originally posted by kadepsyson And? You have a product that noone wants to pay for (EAs own words). It doesnt matter how much it had cost you to produce or how long, its not matter of "is 15$ as an absolute amount large or small sum of money" , only thing that matters is do people see value for their money, and they should consider THAT before launch. If you offer (advertise) something for free, and its far form free dont sulk when you get the beating, because its your own fault. |
|
|
11/22/12 3:21:15 AM#29
I would charge people 50 cents everytime they use space bar to skip the endless bable from the NPCs in quest. show me the money. |
|
|
11/22/12 3:32:35 AM#30
You could get rid of players that don't intend to spend a dime on the game easily by....keeping it p2p..
|
|
|
11/22/12 3:53:00 AM#31
I logged in on my lvl 40 to check out the hype and maybe play a little. As it turned out i only had 2 quick bars so i logged off in disgust. Just to much work for the hassle. Funny thing is that i have no problem paying a sub either, but annoyed people dont like spending money. Simply put, its about reeling people in, and not annoying them.
|
|
|
11/22/12 4:02:58 AM#32
Silly us, thinking free to play meant free to play.
|
|
|
11/22/12 4:05:04 AM#33
Originally posted by JRRNeiklot "Free to play" is not the same as "Everything for nothing." |
|
|
11/22/12 4:12:30 AM#34
Originally posted by mikahr I still don't get this complaint. Even the dumb action bar restrictions don't get in the way of playing 1-50. None of the classes are restricted, only races. The credit limit isn't an issue until post-50. Same goes for the AH limitation. About the only thing that could be considered a real "issue" is the slower experience gains, but if anything it just encourages people to try out all the various stuff in the game besides questing (warzones, space missions, flashpoints). Playing the game as a free player at 50 is a different story, but I think the whole point is that by then, if people have enjoyed the game, they'll start subscribing. It's not meant to be free forever, or with trivial restrcitions. If that was the case, why would anyone sub? |
|
|
11/22/12 4:30:35 AM#35
Originally posted by asmkm22 I wouldnt play 1-50 with the bar restriction. That said i think the issue lies in how things are percived. Its just alot of annoying things. |
|
|
11/22/12 4:46:32 AM#36
Originally posted by Corehaven Agreed, just annoying someone into paying for a game they didn't play in the first place will not get them to fork over cash for it. The differences have to be much more subtle, stuff players would want, but not necessarily need for the game to function. Needed things like a bank and working action bars. I mean, f'ing with the ui and charging you to make it functional? Herpa Derpa. I see the darkness at the end of the tunnel. If they keep this crap up, they will be long gone before this time next year. Star Wars, couldn't have a better base to build a game around, so much lore to work with, and yet they manage to fudge the MMO's up every time. _____________________ GenLock |
|
|
11/22/12 5:54:53 AM#37
This game is closer to games such as Diablo 3 than it is to a full MMO. Therefore price it similarly. You should pay once for the retail box and thereafter have access to the game without a monthly sub fee. There should be no stupid restrictions on quickbars, banks, hiding your head slot, xp gain, etc. There should be a cash shop that sells standard items such as xp boosts, items with unique looks that are not more powerful than items that can be earned in game, vehicles with unique looks, new companions, and new playable species. There could be periodic new content packs (flashpoints, operations, space missions, warzones, even whole new planets) that would require a one time unlock at modest prices. That's a model that I can see being the only way this game can thrive for years to come. It's probably too radical a move for EA right now. But they could easily make the current F2P implementation much more agreeable to players but just getting rid of a few poorly chosen and angrily received restrictions:
CU FP#0: The game must be fun. This overrides all the other FPs. Interested in: TESO, Wildstar, CU |
|
|
11/22/12 6:13:02 AM#38
The problem I have with the game is the value of fun.. The game in it's complete form with everything unlocked is worth maybe $5 a month.. With EA's gimped F2P options it's worth even less.. Most everyone left because the game just isn't fun and had little to do with subscriptions.. However, Bioware isn't going to do a NGE revamp, so the game is what it is and will NEVER greatly improve.. The only viable option is to play with how much does it cost to play.. I personally dislike their F2P set up.. It really rubs me as just another poor money grab..
|
|
|
11/22/12 6:42:47 AM#39
Originally posted by asmkm22 So, in short its not free. What part of that you dont understand. |
|
|
11/22/12 11:02:37 AM#40
Applaud Opening Post
|
|