Most (MOST not ALL) F2P games also have a subscription model, yes.

I take it that this is a lot of people's first F2P? Those prices are pretty average. $12 for a suit of armor? I guess you've never spent $20 on a mount, or $10 for a sword, or $25 for a ship. $12 is cheap.

More pants for counselors and inqusitors. More uniform sets (various clothing uniforms and armor) Opposite faction options. Not that it makes a difference from a gameplay standpoint, but from an RP standpoint... my Imperial Agent is a spy, it doesn't do him much good to wander around in an Imperial uniform, would be nice if he could get a set of Republic uniforms, and/or be able to wear Smuggler gear that looks like Smuggler gear. The same could be said for Smugglers too, wearing an Imperial uniform, might get them past a checkpoint a little more often Please make more "adaptable" clothing sets.

Hehe, I got my purple, so I am happy

They can most certainly change how this game ends, it's 3000 years before the Death Star, they can come in and say "it was all a dream, JR's not dead, and the emperor is really on Ortolan" Having a preapproved "direction" doesn't mean that Lucasarts can't come in tomorrow and add a stipulation that "All male jedi must wear banana hammocks" They own the land, they let EA/BW rent it to plant tomatoes, and you're foolish if you think that the license doesn't state "subject to approval" and/or "Lucasarts reservest the right to ammend this license at any time"

There was a HUGE argument not too long ago with regards to them removing the light/dark restrictions from color crystals.

That wouldn't be so bad, but could we forgo the standard Whedon camera angles? They give me a h eadache on TV, can you imagine in Imax or 3D?

If anyone wants to come over, I got pizza rolls ;-)

"Full Creative License" means they have the RIGHT to create whatever they want, to PUBLISH that content though, they still have to go through LA. It also doesn't mean that the company that controls the license can't make a few "creative changes" Why don't you ask SOE. NGE wasn't SOE's idea it was the brainchild of that idiot Julio Torres, who works for LA (and still does). Let's not forget KOTOR II either. Obsidian had "full creative license." Obsidian, to their credit, really DID have a decent story, before THAT got torpedoed by LA because they wanted it on shelves in time for Christmas, so the story h as some huge holes in it. Just because Disney "OWNS" Lucasarts now, doesn't mean that LA still won't have THEIR hands in the cookie jar, even if Disney doesn't take an active role. But you can bet LA would make changes that they think will please their new masters, and ultimately feed that down to EA. Some other folks are taking our friendly jibes at Disney a little too seriously I think. Yeah we k now they own other companies, yeah they have made edgier movies, but it doesn't matter if Disney decided to go into the pr0n business, the FACE of Disney is always going to be: and edited to A New Hope, where the Jawa's sing "Hi-Ho, Hi-Ho, it's snatching droids we go...." that sketch in Robot Chicken where Obi-wan sings "a Certain point of view" will become reality. Star Destroyers with Cars faces. R2-D2 replaced by Goofy. A section in the movies where a group of teenagers lives in a huge loft without parents, or jobs, but yet can somehow afford to live there. Darth Sparrow "Interesting" Emperor Hook "Bring me Luke Skywalker!" It doesn't matter how well Disney's "outside" projects do, it doesn't matter if there was a lot of shooting and killing in Avengers (Coulson's not dead BTW!), because that is not the FACE of Disney, and we are always going to riff on that.

So when they finally settle New Alderaan, do we get Leia singing "A Whole New World?"

Boy this thread has balooned since I posted my first response. But there is a lot to consider there. Don't get me wrong, I am in FAVOR of the same sex scenario's, I am just curious as to what might be considered TOO FAR in the eyes of the Disney front office, not to mention what the purchase means to our game in general. I WOULD like to know where people are getting the information that Disney is talking to Timothy Zahn, because the article I read, which came from the AP stated that Lucas has an outline, or a rough draft as to what Episode 7 was about and the woman that takes over as CEO of Lucasfilm was going to roll with that. But I would much rather see Zahn's work. I am willing to give Disney the benefit of the doubt. But I swear, if I see John Ratzenburger as the voice of the Death Star, I will personally drive all of my SW related items to Lucas' house and jam them in his beard.

A word from BW on if/how this affects us would be nice. I am sure as a licensee they weren't totally blindsided by this like I was when I first saw it on the news, would be interesting to know if being under the Disney banner will cause a "change in direction" for the game. I would assume they will probably tone down the darkside options, probably scale back the sexual interactions and I would assume scrap the same sex scenario's all together. I will say this: Star Wars doesn't need: Flying Elephants Goofy (we already have Gungans and in our game Evocii for that.) Fairies Talking speeders And I think we already have our quota on princesses.... So what really can they bring to the table? As far as Episode 7, as I understand it, it's going to be an original work by Lucas (or at least based on it), however personally I want the Heir to the Empire trilogy myself.

I got short changed by a month... I only show 1400 as an Early Access, DX, constant subscriber. Not that 150 will make that big a difference I don't think, but still.

I have the loading screen issue when switching, also the taxi bug, and some planets (namely the starter planets) show weird glitches of mty laser fire.

Actually that's a good point