Jump to content

priest

Members
  • Posts

    318
  • Joined

Reputation

10 Good

Personal Information

  • Location
    Memphis
  • Interests
    Music, Literature, Theology, Star Wars (go figure), Travel
  • Occupation
    Human Resources
  1. It's funny...everything you have described here could get you in horrible trouble in regard to anti-trust and various global competition laws. Its interesting to see them practiced and promoted.
  2. I felt like I was reading Paul's letter to the Corinthians. She is speaking down the mount to her loyal parishioners. Wow.
  3. Respectfully, this isn't the issue at all. The issue is not a disorganized or paradoxical canon...though some of that exists. The problem is that some of us feel like publishers, looking at a business model, have moved the canon to such a place that it isn't recognizable as Star Wars anymore. It's all heavy handed, dark, and it lacks the romance and heroic spirit that it had in the Bantam Spectra days. It's not about an organizational issue...if that was the case a good Wiki would make us all agree. It's about content...not continuity.
  4. I call it "The Game." just because it's really the only thing I'm playing now.
  5. Ok, I am getting ready to invoke what some would say blasphemy...but JJ Abrams retconned the entire Star Trek Universe with his movie release. Some may see it as bad, however I see it as fresh. It allows for the author to refresh the story, and doesn't invalidate everything before...it uses it and allows it to exist, but then an "Alternate Reality," also exists on top of it. This is Science Fiction, we should have no problem with diverging realities.
  6. I'm an old school, started with Heir to the Empire EU fan. I feel that pretty much everything NJO and after lost that (and I'm going to pull an SWG term here) Starwarsy and Iconic feel to it. I think in the haste to appeal to the new up and coming, darker, grittier science fiction fanbase, they made the story far heavier and as such it lost its innocence. That being said, I wouldn't want a relaunch, I'd want to retconn back to pre NJO. see what you think
  7. Traviss is an excellent author. But she is a horrible Star Wars author. of course, I'm all about the Bantam Spectra era, and I think Del Rey sucks hardcore....But that's just my opinion.
  8. Kickstarter was precisely what I was thinking about. Shares isn't really a good term...but I'm not sure what else it could be.
  9. Not that dramatic....It's not like someone can say, "I want a unicorn with a lightsaber horn!" (to pull from pokket's interview with James O.) and Bioware says, "Yup...here ya go." It has to be realistic.; there would have to be channels of discussion and prioritization. As for discussion, we're doing it right now. Votes can happen on forums, and if you're not present...you don't vote. Again, I concede, it's probably a really stupid thing for me to even have posted this, I just couldn't get the idea off my mind. There are so many creative, knowledgeable people in the community (and a whole bunch of flametards) that I thought, hey...if EA is considering a F2P model...is there something in between? Is there a way to entice people to continue to pay the monthly subscription...and it not just be for credits for gear, which is what it would be if they moved to a F2P model? That is when, in my opinion, the game dies, when the game's financing is simply to get more stuff. If EA could drop an olive branch like that...creating a way for the players themselves to have a vote, a say, be included in the direction of the game...they may be able to reverse the loss trend. Just my thoughts, I'm putting my flame-retardant suit back on.
  10. Yes I do. In fact I had a whole paragraph on it that I cut because I didn't think it was worth mentioning. What's his bucket from EA said that it's in the top 10, but not the top 5...which means that it is probably making profit, but not nearly at the price point that they want it to be; and I'm sure that it doesn't even come close to halfing Madden. It isn't a priority. To EA, SWTOR is simply a revenue stream, and to be honest...a supplemental one at that which keeps the break room coffeepots boiling. That's why they can afford to be so cavalier with the game as soon as it shows significant dips in subscriber numbers and profitability. They won't think twice about cutting SWTOR off. That's reality kiddies.. So there are three things they can do: 1- They can find the solution to raise subscriber numbers; 2- they can mitigate the risk by downsizing costs (personnel, new content schedule, F2P) Or they can just cut their losses. Regarding the Armchair Devs...that's not what I'm suggesting at all. Just like the owners of the Packers don't call the plays on the field, there would still be professionals doing the work. I'm just curious if anyone has considered this type of model before...a community owned and driven AAA MMORPG.
  11. It probably wouldn't work...This all stems from me seeing an article on the Green Bay Packers, and how they are community owned. My whole thought was, "what would happen if 1.3 million players grouped together and bought controlling rights to the game?"
  12. Hi, I have been having a great time with this game. TBH, I liked SWG more...which might put what I say into perspective. I see a lot of discussion here on F2P, lots of people pushing for it and then others against it. I think F2P is game breaking because the model of the game itself depends on first dollar investment for all of the animation and voice acting. Not only do you have to pay people to world design...you also have to pay them to voice act, animate characters, post-produce...and all of this takes time and money. F2P doesn't really account for this model of game, so if it goes this way, I doubt seriously that Bioware would be very interested in turning out new content expediently. But all of this talk comes from the fact that it seems that EA and the customers have different levels of expectation on what this game should be. Firstly, I don't think the game is busted...It works. It may not work the way YOU want it to work, but it does. Heck, it doesn't work the way I want it to...if I had my choice it would be Sandbox all the way with open worlds and PVP free-flight space combat (There's my SWG showing.) But the game does work. This got me thinking, so far, there are only two models in gaming that I'm aware of for MMO. 1- you've got the traditional WoW monthly subscription where you are a customer receiving a scripted experience in exchange for a set value. 2- F2P where anyone can play the game to a point, but to be competitive you must invest in it. I was wondering about a third option. What if instead of subscriptions, players became shareholders? EA starts out at 100% stake, but gradually 'sells' shares to the players. EA gets their investment capital back plus dividend, and slowly the player base, should the game survive could corporately own a small piece of creative control on their experience. Perhaps some sort of re-up charge to maintain your control credits...like a monthly or yearly due to input money back into the system to pay for development of new experiences. I don't have it all fleshed out...it was just a concept that came to me this morning, and who knows...someone might already be doing this. I personally like the idea of a player base purchasing control of a game from a company, and I can't think of anyone who would lose in this situation.
×
×
  • Create New...