Subscription: Advertisement vs Truth

You realize how quickly you lose any credibility by attacking other people?

This isn't bait and switch. You aren't being promised any of this stuff for a specific amount of time. They aren't lying about anything.

Is it morally sound for them to make a profit by charging for things that some people disagree with them charging for? Meh, not really. But please, show me a morally sound business that makes a profit.

This is called reality. I suggest you join it. You are paying to play a game that is constantly changing. You even agreed to a LEGAL document saying you accept that. Hell -- they can shut the servers down in 30 days (obviously, if they /cancel all recurring subs, and refund those with longer subscriptions) and you have no foot to stand on.

Doesn't matter if it is a moral decision or not. And to cry about a small "species" customization? Maybe they should've included cathar in RotHC and charged $40 for non-subs, and $30 for subs.

But wait -- we'd still have people crying over something!

Don't like the business? Don't support the business. It's called reality -- you shouldn't waste your time trying to keep a business moral, because they couldn't care less about you.

The issue which I presented really applies to the principle of the matter, not the Cathar race specifically. The idea that the very page you guys use to advertise for becoming a sub is subject to change at any moment really doesn't feel very safe to me. The fear (That I had when I started this thread) was that other areas of the game will begin to follow the same path.The "fluff" is nearly exclusive to the CM and watching how this is developing I'm just fearing one day when I wake up and read about a new flashpoint being released the same way.

I would like to point you to ----------> http://www.swtor.com/legalnotices/euala

Why worry now?

In all seriousness, there really isn't any proof that they will ever head down the road of FPs or WZs or OPs being purchaseable solely through CC -- unless, of course, it's an expansion.

Don't let others drag you down into the slippery slope fear. Enjoy the game, play it as you'd like to (within the terms and such BW gave you, of course) and stop worrying.

If it happens? THEN you should say something. That is the point where you unsub and let them know why you did.

Constantly being afraid of what might happen is no way to live your life. And it's certainly no way to play a video game >.<

Its not really about the actual laws. I'm not a native speaker so my use of false advertisement seemed to have pushed people to think I was taking about EA/Bioware breaking laws (I'm sorry for that). I'm more talking about the safety of being a subscriber to this game.

I was tiered and has just read the post about the Cathar and Barber Shop on Dulfy, naturally I worry. I like playing this game, there's wonderful people, rather fun content so if there's something I'm afraid of I'd rather try to express my opinion on the matter. I'm not one for just waiting for things to go down and then abandon something I like.

You can only "alter the deal" so far before you get another group of players leaving.

Everyone should take a screenshot of all the original descriptions for parts of this game before we get more backstabbing.

I'm not going to complain until I see it implemented.

- Arcada

Facts would seem to counter your assumptions.

Let's use outfits as an example. Pre-CM there were new items added into the game that cost you nothing beyond your basic subscription. Then the CM came and those items went exclusively to the CM for the equivalent of a month's subscription cost per set. They had full mods in them worth 100,000's of credits. Then the outfits dropped those expensive mods, and went up in price by roughly 25%. Then those outfits were shifted to where we are now, almost exclusively only available in gambling bags that are likely to cost you much much more than a few months worth of subscription to attain.

In that example, an outfit went from "free" to potentially $50+ of real world money in a few short months. If that is not the definition of "slippery slope", I don't know what is.

I'm sure the money the "altered deal" gains them will more than offset what they lose from people who can't adapt to the changing nature of the business model so I really doubt they're sweating it too much.