I complained, but not about Legacy Names. I complained about character names. I paid to get early access for a reason. Yet, I lose all but one of my names. I made sure to get in and reserve my names on the server I chose early, but because I was forced to move to a new server that was younger than the one I started on, I lost my character names. I was known on my server by those names, and many of the people I played with would know those names. I couldn't care less about Legacy Names, it was character names that mattered to me. Sadly, it's too late now, but they should have given name priority to those with the oldest play date for that character name. If someone had made their character on December 21st, they should get to keep the name over someone who made their character name in March or April. Basically, for me at least, losing character names killed my interest in the game. It may seem silly to some, but RPG means something. My characters name was part of my story for them. Sure, I could just change it....but it was the principle of the matter for me.

Beta player here too. But only till the 19th. My sub ends on the 19th, and I am out for a while. Can't find a reason to keep paying for the game. I'll give it a while to find some content, and then maybe come back around.

WoW won't be F2P unless they get down to a couple millions subs, but Titan will be Free to Play at launch. Blizzard already said they weren't going to use the traditional monthly sub model for the game. It's out there, you can search around and find it.

It's funny, this wasn't Bioware's decision. It was EA's. And EA has to answer to the investors, called stockholders. F2P games make more money than P2P. It's a fact. You can look it up, Turbine showed a 500% increase in revenue when it made LotRO Free to play. Star Trek Online went F2P after it's sister Champions Online showed a 300% revenue increase, and now both games make more than they did as P2P games. There is a reason Free to Play is so common. People, silly as they are, seem to not be able to warrant paying a monthly fee, but they have no issue buying something from a game store that cost them 20 bucks. Games like Need for Speed World, which is another EA product, sell a single car for nearly 20 bucks, and in some cases over that. People buy them. A new car every week. It's simple math. Perfect World, the largest free-to-play gaming network says that they average 43% of their players buy their in-game currency in a month. The average amount spent on that currency is $25 per person that buys it. That's an average, and I am sure some months are better and others are worse. And the in-game store also matters. But the point is that people don't think logically when it comes to gaming fees. Most people think about the monthly fee, and they start to feel negatively. I am buying time, but if I don't use it...it's wasted. So I'd rather not pay for something I won't be using enough to justify paying for. But with F2P, they can come and go as they please. And when they do come to play, they might find something new they want to do, or have, in the store. So they spend some money. When the new wears off, they go play something else. All the while, they never feel obligated to play a game because they have limited time to play it that expires at a certain time. Those who DO want to just pay the monthly fee, they have that option. People who don't pay the monthly fee usually pay more in the same month for access to the same things that sub players get. DDO is a perfect example of a game where paying the monthly sub is cheaper that trying to buy access to in game content. However, some see that buying it once being more valuable. You can pay the $15 bucks, you get access to everything for 30 days. VIP. Or, you can pay $25 one time, get yourself access to the stuff you WANT to play, and you have that access forever. What happens when your VIP runs out? You lose access to the stuff you haven't paid for, and you have nothing to show for it. Think of it like this: You can buy a bucket, cost you $25 bucks. But you can use it whenever you want, for as long as the bucket exists. Or, you can rent one for $15 bucks, and you can use it whenever you want, for 30 days. Then you have to pay $15 again or lose your bucket. This is why F2P works, and why it makes more money in the long run. Once you buy something, it's yours. You can come and go and use it whenever you like, no additional fee required. Monthly fees give you temporary access, and you can't keep access to anything when it's done. F2P bad for SWtOR? What we don't know that EA does, is how many subs are already canceled, but the accounts are still active due to time left. From my years in game development, when you are dealing with any multiplayer game, population is a large factor. The entire point of Multiplayer is being able to play with other people. When your population dips too low, people are scared to sign up. They think the game is dead, or dying. The game essentially becomes "single player online". Much like this game was on 90% of the servers before the "transfers". People have an even harder time justifying paying a monthly fee to play alone. EA knows how many people are on "borrowed" time, before their sub ends. They know, where we do not, how many people will be playing next month or even in two months. They know who canceled, and who hasn't. If you are going to have a staff running a game, and you are going to continue to let that game live...you have to cover it's cost. If the monthly subs will be too low to do that, you have to make decisions. Take the loss and hope for better days, shut it down...or find a way to bring in more revenue. Enough to cover the costs. Well, apparently EA thinks that F2P will do that, and subs won't. My best guess is that when the 6 month subs run out soon, the game will be dipping down below that 500k mark they talked about before. Of course, I can't take that 500k mark to seriously as being to maintain the game like they claimed. I mean, this is the same dev team that told us they had a years worth of content ready to go at launch, yet we have seen very little of it. So, either it got erased and they had to start over...or they might have fudged it a bit. You decide which one you want to believe. But one thing you can count on, EA wants to make money, and they wouldn't go F2P unless they believed it was going to do exactly that.

So, what's the difference on the chart where it says: Each Paid month from August 1st to free to play launch. And All active players from August 1st to free to play launch. What's the difference there? If I have to log in every day, forget it. There is nothing for me to do now, which is why I haven't played in weeks.

I'll be honest, I unsubbed. My sub doesn't end until September, however, but I haven't logged in since 1.2. Haven't even downlaoded 1.3. Nothing in it interests me.... I unsubbed because there is literally nothing left for me to do in game, and I didn't rush. I took my time, 4 hours a day about 5 days a week at best. My issue isn't so much with the lack of end game content, it's the lack of attempts to add to it. Three major updates come out and we got almost nothing new to do. I can't help but say it again, all that work on the useless Legacy system could have been used to make new content for end game. Granted, the game isn't a year old, but when you release 3 updates which add content that only increases how fast you can do the content that is there...someone has to wonder who was drinking the wrong punch. When you have so little to do at endgame already, why would you give people the tools to rush through it even faster. I don't dislike the Legacy system, but it was something that should have been in at launch. By the time we got it, the majority of the players didn't need it. Imagine how much more could have been added to the end game had they just held the legacy system back. My entire guild, 178 people first 30 days of launch, have moved on except myself and 2 others. They all left for the same reason. Yes, I know there are OP's and flashpoints to do, and there is PvP as well as daily missions. But honeslty, how long one person do those things before they start looking for something else to do? They could have given us a new mission line each month, even if it was 5 dailies and a 5 part story piece, and half my guild would have stayed. It wold have at least shown an effort to get end game content in. Instead, they keep going over what is already in and adding to the low level content with Legacy and it's associated perks. Well, that's great...but there was plenty to do do low levels anyway. Whatever. No sense kicking the dead horse. With the forced server mergers coming, it will kill my intentions to play again. My server was transferred to a server that I would have lost all my character names but one, including my legacy name (which was strange because it isn't very common). I pre-ordered to get early access to assure my character names. And now I am forced to give them up because I can't pick where I transfer to? if anyone in my guild came back later, they wouldn't find me since all my characters would have new names. Might seem trivial to many people, but our characters are supposed to be more than just pixels on a screen. We grow attached to them. So, yeah. I unsubbed. And in the grand scheme of things, most don't care. But there are ton of players who feel like I do, maybe not for the exact same reasons, but they still just aren't happy with the game. But it's okay, just keep thinking that the decline is only a momentary thing. With other games coming out, GW2 doesn't even have a sub...it's silly to think that people would stick around when they aren't happy. Personally, I am looking at The Secret World. They do monthly content updates. Sure, might not be expansion worthy stuff, but like I said. Something is better than nothing, at least you know your money is being spent on the game and not on some random pizza party that you aren't even invited to.

Well, all of us pay for this game...so we all have just as much right as you do to post here, even if it isn't to worship Bioware. I keep wondering why the majority of the people are complaining about the game, but yet they are all wrong and the baker's dozen who aren't complaining are right. I think that is how our government works too, and look where we are with that.

You're wrong. The Q&A posted today confirmed it. I haven't migrated. My sub is up in September, haven't been logged in for over 90 days. Nothing new to do, so I been elsewhere. I wont' migrate, because I refuse to change my character names. I pre-ordered for early access to help guarantee my character names. All but one of them are already taken on the destination server. I won't give up my character names for something out of my control, such as where we migrate to. Everyone knnow me by those names, so it's really not feasible for me to change them. Not that I expect new content before my sub is up anyway, but I doubt I will resub when it cancels. It may seem like whining to the lucky people who got to keep their names and/or were already on the servers being transferred to, but it's really not fair for most of us. And I'm sorry Bioware, but the little trinkets you are giving out for character transfers are not going to make it any better for me. Hate me, I don't care. But anyone in the same situation can understand the anger many of us have. The more you people keep bashing those of us who aren't happy, the smaller your community gets. Who you gonna play with when everyone leaves? And you will all be the first ones complaining when the game ends up Free to Play just to survive because F2P players don't typically care how they treat people. So, go ahead and keep bashing people. It's always a great way to get people to leave.

This was one of the things I talked about and got scolded. A lot of people seem to think that a lot of people are returning for ranked warzones, which are still supposed to come in 1.3. If this is true...people will be quite disappointed to transfer on the 12th, and then find out their server woke up again on the 16th. You give up legacy and character names to have a more active server, but ultimately didn't need to because your old server is active again. It's early, and maybe I'm not being clear but I think you get the point. Bioware hasn't thought of this because they seem to think that "people want server transfers to put all their characters on the same server." They said it in an interview recently. They completely dismissed that people were tired of "dead" servers. Anyway. All I am saying is, people are going to rush on the 12th to transfer and try to claim their names. And may end up upset when 1.3 goes live if all these sleeping players return for ranked.

Won't it be hard to play in ranked warzones if your server is empty? Why does everyone call ranked warzones new content? It's the same content, only now they track wins and losses. Anyway. I guess you guys don't read as much as I do, and my point wasn't clear. I am not saying transfers aren't important and necessary. The transfers start June 12th. The 1.3 update is June 16th. I read it in the blog. And the 100 people I mentioned in my post, they haven't unsubbed. They just stopped playing the game until ranked WZ's come out, which is supposed to be in 1.3 update. So. All that said. My server might seem empty, but if the 100 people or more that I mention suddenly start playing again on the 16th...one might be disappointed to have transferred off the server on the 12th. You stand to lose legacy and character names when you transfer, if someone else has them already over there. It would add salt to the wound to find out the server you just left suddenly got populated again by the people on hiatus waiting for 1.3. Sure, 100 people isn't a huge number. But it's plenty to run warzones. So a person transfers and gives up legacy and character names because they see a seemingly dead server, they don't know these people are coming back. If they did see the population jump, they would stick around and not transfer right now. How is that a conspiracy? It's a sensible question. If the update was still a few weeks away, I wouldn't be thinking about this. But it's 4 days after transfers. And I get told all the time, it's all over the forums, how a huge chunk of the population will be back to play ranked warzones. Sorry to offend you. But it's not a conspiracy.

I know about 100 people on my server who are waiting for ranked warzones to return to the game. So, if ranked does come with 1.3, as they have said...many people would return to many servers. but they return to find that everyone transferred off that server. Since it's only 4 days difference, between the transfers going live and the 1.3 update...why not just wait and do them both at the same time? Wait and see if people really do return for ranked warzones. Unless Bioware knows ranked isn't coming in 1.3 and just haven't disappointed us yet.

And if you don't...open your legacy panel. They are all in there.

Heh. I posted this before they ever went live. I posted it when 1.2 was in testing, from my own information gathered on the test server. And what happened? They released them anyway. Sadly, the entire Legacy system is rather useless at this point. If you are planning to level a new alt, you can find some useful things in there for a little while, but there aren't many players left who are going to level new alts. The majority of us want new content, not faster ways to do the existing content. Worst part is, they are adding these new Legacy Options, and then do an interview where they say they were surprised people made it through the content so quickly. Why make it faster and easier for us to do if you were already shocked we went so fast? Someone isn't talking to the other guy in the cubicle. This whole thing needs a reset...in my opinion.

If they really wanted to stop Tanks from using DPS gear, all they have to do instead of nerfing is the suggestion I made over a month ago. Simply add to the armor: Requires at least X number of points in X to use. You can do this across the board. Each set of armor was made with a particular spec build in mind. Adding this means you have to invest heavily in that tree. There. No more Ironfist and you didn't have to nerf anyone.

Maybe you should read the original post. Why are you so defensive? He didn't accuse anyone of anything. He said he saw it, and asked if anyone else had. He asked if it was a glitch or an exploit. He could have come in calling names and such, but he chose to ask first. You must feel like what you are doing is shady or something, because otherwise you wouldn't be so defensive.