Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Underwhelmed by Galactic Starfighter

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
Underwhelmed by Galactic Starfighter

Retro_Chrome's Avatar


Retro_Chrome
12.11.2013 , 06:06 PM | #51
Quote: Originally Posted by JimG View Post
Yeah, you're missing a lot of things. We're 1 week into early access for subs. Preferred and F2P don't have access yet. Full release of GSF isn't until February. Some people don't have access to gunships yet if they subbed after Nov. 1st. Bombers aren't in the game yet. There are supposed to be 24 total ships for the February release. This is just the first game mode and the first 2 maps. Again, we're just in early access period. This isn't a full release of all game modes and maps....and obviously they will still be adding to all of this stuff as we go along.

They haven't developed PVE yet because it takes a lot more time to development competent AI enemies than to do the PVP set up. I'm sure they'll add PVE stuff at some point.

BW calls its an expansion. It's a free mini-game. This is a MMO, not a flight simulator game. It's a free add-on mini-game. This was pretty clear into the announcements they made about GSF. Anyone expecting different eithe wasn't paying attention or they had unrealistic, unfounded expectations.

There's no joystick support because they didn't want a free add-on mini-game in a F2P game to require people to buy a joystick just to be able to competitively play the thing. They wanted this free mini-game to be more accessible to everyone. Frankly, we are all playing with the same controls so it shouldn't matter anyway.

There is absolutely no need to spend one penny on GSF. You can level your ship just fine without spending anything. The additional ships are cosmetic....and they have been saying since the CM launched over a year ago that cosmetic stuff would go through the CM....not sure why people still can't comprehend that concept over a year later. People can spend CCs if they want to power level a ship....just like you can buy legacy XP boosts with CC or buy consumable XP boosts too. As long as you can't buy something that is more powerful than what I can get without spending CCs, then it's not really a problem. If some people want to spend some CCs to power-level, then so be it. It's not really a big deal. I haven't spent any CCs on ship upgrades and my ship has progressed and competes just fine. I'm so sick of seeing the phrase "cash grab". This is a freaking business, not a charity or a public service. They made this game to make money....of course they are going to try to do things to make more money....and without the CM, there would be no game for people to whine about.

As for legacy, I'd expect that there will be more tie-ins to legacy, but I'm sure they didn't want some of us having a 3 month head start on earning vendor Rep, legacy rewards, etc. over everyone else since GSF doesn't fully launch until Feb. Also, it does tie-in to the ground game. There will be a flashpoint and character intro for it. Again, we're just in the beginning of early access so that stuff isn't part of it yet.

No offense, but not one thing you said hasn't already been brought up and talked about repeatedly in the forums. You could have spent 5 minutes googling GSF and found out about all the stuff that will be in there by the Feb full release. It would be great if people could just add their opinions to existing threads that have already covered what they have to say instead of creating new threads which are just repetitive and clutter up the forums.
thanks you for saying this^^
Quote: Originally Posted by Kyrandis View Post
I hate to say this but we are in terms of genetics 96% the same as chimps. We evolved from chimps, but damn I must say that 4% makes all the difference.

PlasmaJohn's Avatar


PlasmaJohn
12.11.2013 , 06:29 PM | #52
Quote: Originally Posted by JimG View Post
There's no joystick support because they didn't want a free add-on mini-game in a F2P game to require people to buy a joystick just to be able to competitively play the thing. They wanted this free mini-game to be more accessible to everyone. Frankly, we are all playing with the same controls so it shouldn't matter anyway.
GSF wasn't done out of altruism, EA is hoping to attract new players. Funny thing about this particular niche is that at the very least those players expect joystick/gamepad support. Quite a few insist on it. My office is full of gamers, the looks of disbelief when I mentioned that it didn't have stick support were priceless with plenty of comments questioning their sanity. Yeah... lack of stick support lost them potential customers.

Quote:
I'm so sick of seeing the phrase "cash grab". This is a freaking business, not a charity or a public service. They made this game to make money....of course they are going to try to do things to make more money....and without the CM, there would be no game for people to whine about.
Judging by the GTN, business seems to be more art than science. The best way to make money is to do things that make people want to pay you. EA is doing it completely backwards. They make customers feel like marks (at least this customer does). They act like their players are on the verge of leaving so must be squeezed of every last cent they can get.

Audiva - Cogohi - Malkerson - Mysalia - OIejandro - Roxiani - Szachi
Aldriovok - Jubelee - Korduun - Mikkiani - Ojain - Oromunroe - Ryliani

Hambunctious's Avatar


Hambunctious
12.11.2013 , 06:46 PM | #53
Quote: Originally Posted by PlasmaJohn View Post
The best way to make money is to do things that make people want to pay you. EA is doing it completely backwards. They make customers feel like marks (at least this customer does). They act like their players are on the verge of leaving so must be squeezed of every last cent they can get.
Wow, I hadn't looked at it that way, but now that you mention it, that seems like that's how it is.

That's signature worthy.

Yorumi's Avatar


Yorumi
12.11.2013 , 06:49 PM | #54
I have just one question that no one ever seems to answer. If exp buffs are pay to win, then why is anyone able to join the game after launch day? They don't automatically start at the level of the highest level player in the game. How do you distinguish any leveling system at all from pay to win if simply gaining exp is pay to win?

DAMossimo's Avatar


DAMossimo
12.11.2013 , 09:20 PM | #55
Quote: Originally Posted by Yorumi View Post
I have just one question that no one ever seems to answer. If exp buffs are pay to win, then why is anyone able to join the game after launch day? They don't automatically start at the level of the highest level player in the game. How do you distinguish any leveling system at all from pay to win if simply gaining exp is pay to win?
Your question assumes there is a constant temporal-monetary equality where none exists, or is at the very least, undefinable.

How much money in US Dollars equals one hour of game-time grinding? My guess is if you were to ask everyone who plays the game, there would be a wide range of answers.

GalacticKegger's Avatar


GalacticKegger
12.11.2013 , 10:05 PM | #56
Quote: Originally Posted by Tenacity View Post
The monetization issue bothered me at first, until I realized that you really dont ever have to spend cartel coins on GSF (at least not at the moment).

If you do the daily and weekly missions for GSF, you'll rack up fleet requisition at a decent enough rate, and all you need it for is unlocking new ships or crew. You also gain requisition for all of your ships no matter which one you're flying (though notably more for the ship that you fly), so over the course of ten or so games you might gain 6000 requisition on the scout you always fly, and you'll find that you have 2000 or so for any other ships in your hangar (these numbers are not accurate, btw, just for elaboration purposes).

Of course that also means that if you always fly one ship type, you can convert the requisition from all your other ships into fleet requisition.

My only real issue with the system is that unlocking equipment only unlocks it for the ship you're selected on. I unlock a weapon type for one of my scouts, and my other scout doesnt get it, so if you fly multiple ships you have to do a lot more work that anyone who flies just one ship.
Agreed, though I wonder how quickly it would top out if both the component and tree unlocks were available legacy-wide. Legacy component unlocks would be cool because then any legacy character could jump right in and at least have all base loadout options available to them. The trees are the issue I think, similar to having the entire Focus tree from a level 55 Guardian being made available to a newly ordained level 10 Guardian in the Legacy family.

What I think would really help is to have loadout profiles that can be saved like UI profiles, but with tree abilities that haven't been earned yet greyed out so as the pilot advances they self-populate. If the pilot wants to experiment, they can deviate and save to a different profile name.

Just thinking out loud.
"I bled protecting The People's right to free speech; thus I reserve the right to make them bleed for abusing it."
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ~ Edmund Burke‎
"There is no instance of a country having benefitted from a prolonged war." ~ Sun Tsu

GalacticKegger's Avatar


GalacticKegger
12.11.2013 , 10:10 PM | #57
Quote: Originally Posted by Yorumi View Post
I have just one question that no one ever seems to answer. If exp buffs are pay to win, then why is anyone able to join the game after launch day? They don't automatically start at the level of the highest level player in the game. How do you distinguish any leveling system at all from pay to win if simply gaining exp is pay to win?
For Pay2Win to be true, there has to be both a winner and a loser. If in the end nobody stands to lose, then P2W is false.
"I bled protecting The People's right to free speech; thus I reserve the right to make them bleed for abusing it."
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ~ Edmund Burke‎
"There is no instance of a country having benefitted from a prolonged war." ~ Sun Tsu

MalakaiCaine's Avatar


MalakaiCaine
12.13.2013 , 11:03 PM | #58
Quote: Originally Posted by CarpeSangrea View Post
I agree with pretty much everything you said, except for the pve part. Their AI's for the 2d ground game are glitchy enough...they'd never be able to implement one for space.

Considering you can do everything there is to do on GSF with a single character, I think they seriously dropped the ball with having seperate progression for alts.

GSF participation needs to be legacy-wide for each faction.

Mechanically, it needs work also. Mouse movement feels choppy and hypersensitive. And there's no slider for it. I actually have to turn my mouse sensitivity down in windows before playing GSF or controlling my ship with any degree of accuracy is next to impossible.

It's been entertaining, but the shallowness of what they rolled out is causing the shiny to wear off real fast.

flaspoints are awesome...

SPACE flashpoints would be double awesome...

you and three other players up against a frigate. with turrets and shield gens, etc.. and a squadron or two to send at youu......

i see gsf as a testing the waters proof-of-concept type deelio.

hopefully they will see just how badly we love the **** out of it and realise YES, they CAN indeed make money of of more space content, so they sink more money into using the base mechanics to gicve us more space content.

ZavienUK's Avatar


ZavienUK
12.16.2013 , 01:28 PM | #59
Quote: Originally Posted by Itkovian View Post
Because that is NOT what the Free to Play model is. If it was, the F2P model would NOT be the success that it is, and TOR wouldn't have switched to it.

<snip>

So, there you have it. If you don't like the Free to Play model, so be it. But let's not go ahead and fling accusations of "nickel-and-diming" and "money-grabbing" at the devs, when all they're doing is adhering to a PROVEN revenue model.

Asking for subscribers to get even more for free is quite unreasonable.
(snipped to avoid a wall of text - not to be indicate I'm ignoring your points!)

We obviously disagree on what the ethical F2P model should look like, indeed I support it as a way to lower the barrier of entry, and provide an opportunity to earn revenue from players who wouldn’t commit to a monthly fee, and it is also a good way of demonstrating your product with the hope those people will then want to subscribe. However it is my opinion that any game that retains a monthly subscription option should not expect their subscribers to spend additional money on top of this. SWTOR already demonstrated it was unable to survive as a subscription only game, so to convert into what seems to be turning into a ‘subscription+some more money please’ model IS greedy and money-grabbing. I think your naive to not see what is happening here. There are two ways to make the game more profitable:

1. Invest in your game, improve and focus on quality content development, attracting additional players to increase your revenue.
2. Nickel and dime your existing loyal customers for additional revenue

Now which do you think is sustainable in the long term? Which do you think will build loyalty for your game? And which do you think risks alienating your most loyal players?

And asking for frequent quality content updates in exchange for a montly fee seems perfectly reasonable to me.

ZavienUK's Avatar


ZavienUK
12.16.2013 , 01:40 PM | #60
Quote: Originally Posted by JimG View Post
No offense, but not one thing you said hasn't already been brought up and talked about repeatedly in the forums. You could have spent 5 minutes googling GSF and found out about all the stuff that will be in there by the Feb full release. It would be great if people could just add their opinions to existing threads that have already covered what they have to say instead of creating new threads which are just repetitive and clutter up the forums.
I always find it odd people use the phrase 'no offense' right before being a little hostile, but your right I certainly could have googled and somewhat avoided my disappointment. My mistake was my misplaced trust in Bioware with the email I received inviting me back to the game for an 'expansion' and without any mention it was an unfinished product.

I took quite a bit of time over my original post so find it disappointing and slightly offensive that you call it clutter. These are supposed to be discussion forums and that was precisely my reason for posting - to get the opinion of others. If the post doesn't interest you then I would kindly ask you just ignore it, but judging by the number of replies it would suggest it was something other people were interested in discussing.