9/30/09 6:14 PM -
Could Star Wars: The Old Republic have BioWare Bucks? 
by Dover
, posted September 30th, 2009 at 6:14 PM
A few articles on Darth Hater, bothold and new,have focused on the possibility of microtransactions being part of BioWare's pricing structure for Star Wars: The Old Republic.None of the information gathered so far has blatantly stated what plan they will use, and if microtransactions are used, to what extent it would be implemented. However the recent game testing sign ups have revealed yet another piece of information regarding BioWare's interest in at least some elements normally associated with microtransactions.

Many of the prospective testers working with Darth Hater, as well as a commenter named Eria on our website, noticed something while signing up for the game testing on the 29th.Buried within the Terms of Service are some telling sentences that could be revealing more then most users realize. Specifically terms H, I, J, and K deal with "points" and what amount of control BioWare has over said "points".
 

These excerpts all reference "points", and a few key words help to define what they mean when using this term. Phrases such as, "all items acquired for points" and "points rewarded in the Game store", seem to imply that they are similar to Microsoft Points or Nintendo Points. These are all forms of digital currency, normally purchased with real money, for use within a certain program. This basically shows that BioWare could be using a microtransaction system in The Old Republic, at least regarding some form of in-game store.

On the other hand, there are some parts that appear to differentiate these points from other types of digital currency. Specifically, the developer retaining the rights to "add or remove points from your account without warning" which is dramatically distinct from most other companies. Microsoft, for example, only retains the right to "cancel, suspend or otherwise limit your access to your Points balance if we suspect fraudulent, abusive or unlawful activity."

A developer maintaining such a high level of control is indicative of something not related to real world currency. Since there is never a true monetary value associated with the "points", they don't need to justify, or put boundaries on, their level of control. This would suggest that these points are connected to purely in-game actions, more similar to "gold", "isk" or "Credits" then something purchased with real money. Additionally, addendum C-4 has the following quote relating points to a simple in game currency.

Saying things like This game sucks because I lost my points or predictions when I did something that crashed the game is not helpful

This sounds similar to losing gold or EXP.

On the other hand, there is still the fact that this is located in the terms of service for a game testing program. Such a program would almost certainly not require testers to use their own funds in this process so the "points" would need to be manipulated in some way by the developers. Since this is not a live product, BioWare could be adding and removing these "points" from accounts to test a real microtransaction based system and losing said points from glitches could be part of working with an in-game store.

We still can't say one way or the other, but as the information continues to trickle out of Austin, a microtransaction system of some design seem more and more possible. If this does mean BioWare will be using microtransactions, it is up to testers to vet the system and help the developers determine how prominent they will be. It should also be noted that BioWare has only just begun accepting game testing applications, and every facet of TOR is subject to change over the course of the development process.

UPDATE: This article is not confirming Microtransactions will be used in TOR. It is simply a speculative look at certain aspects of the Tester Terms of Service and does it reflect what will be in the final version of the game.
This article's tags:

38 Comments
Comment by Chronx6 made on March 19th, 2010 at 8:12pm
I see no problem with micro transactions as long as everything sold can be got within the game without buying from other players. As long as you do that I have no problem with a guy who works trading a bit of time from work(as that is what the money he gets paid represents.) to get an item rather than wasting his limited game time to farm for it or money to buy it. Or someone paying for a small exp boost to help them level on the weekends seeing as their to busy with life during the week to play much. As long as its nothing insane and any actual items sold can be obtained through just playing I see no reason not to have micro transactions.
 
Comment by DinesenDK made on October 7th, 2009 at 5:53am
Everybody stay calm and try to keep faith in BW. If they fail with this system they will learn the hard way. I know it would be like getting punched in the face now that most of us really love Star Wars and wants to see it success as a MMO. However, this ToS is written for the beta testing group, not the final game (I doubt they use the same ToS, but ofcourse I can be mistaken).

I do agree on the two advantages Axlotl is pointing out.
 
Comment by Быть ли Ð¼Ð¸ÐºÑ€Ð¾Ñ made on October 5th, 2009 at 2:26pm
[...] Star Wars: The Old Republic решили внимательно изучить соглашение для участия в бета-тесте игры и наткнулись [...]
 
Comment by Raithnor made on October 2nd, 2009 at 11:09pm
Here's my thing. If I really love a game. I don't mind putting doing money for a sub fee and then maybe some extras for some useful/cool shinies.

Here's what ticks me off: when they use my love of the game to market totally unrelated crap. An example would in-game exclusive item for buying something totally unrealated to the game. Like say buying the special six movie blue ray box for a pair of in-game sunglasses.
 
Comment by RogueJedi86 made on October 6th, 2009 at 9:28am
Like forcing WoW players to buy card game decks to get cool in-game items?
 
Comment by Legaleese->English | D made on October 2nd, 2009 at 10:01am
[...] Whatever points are (they could just be the generic term for credits) are not worth real money. (I) You acknowledge and agree that all items acquired for points during the Game Program are non-refundable and non-tradable. [...]
 
Comment by Sleuths Dig Up Microtrans made on October 1st, 2009 at 10:32pm
[...] find. Its still worth reminding that this is not final code at all, just a testing program. Could Star Wars: The Old Republic have BioWare Bucks? [Darth Hater via MMORPG.com] Tagged:biowaremicrotransactionsmmopcstar warsstar wars: the old [...]
 
Comment by Boza made on October 1st, 2009 at 6:40pm
I'm guessing that the agreement is a global TOS.

By that I mean they created a universal document to cover all regions in which TOR will be tested/released. It doesn't surprise me at all that this little snippet is included in the TOS, as in Asia, MT's/points will probably be how SW:TOR is marketed.

That being said, I wouldn't expect a full RMT system in the West (Americas EU) because it simply isn't as popular, and hasn't been embraced at the level it would need to be for Bioware to pull the trigger on the business model.

I could be wrong, but this is just an idea that's been floating through the murky ether of my mind in relation to the recent findings.
 
Comment by TaboriHK made on October 1st, 2009 at 2:01pm
These could also be beta rules and they are testing a currency system that WILL be implemented. More clearly stated, they have these extra rules here for the beta because no real money is involved, but they plan to change that at launch and are just testing the waters of the system they've set up with hypothetical transactions.

Hrm, not sure how I feel about that.
 
DH Team
Comment by Zoidberg made on October 1st, 2009 at 2:53pm
It could just be that they will be using points as the currency in beta because it is a catch all and there may be some secret behind Credits they are waiting to reveal. After all, money is worthless in beta due to the frequent wipes.
Points could also be a way to make sure people test. Perhaps instead of using credits you need to spend points. You gain points by finding bugs and filling out surveys, while you can still loot credits it wont do much good in the beta economy.
 
Comment by RogueJedi86 made on October 6th, 2009 at 6:35am
I also really like that idea of getting Points for actually testing the beta. Maybe require a tester to have X amount of Points to progress to the next phase of Beta testing, so they only have valuable testers in the pool carrying over. You lose the players who are just goofing off dueling in town not testing. To ensure fairness, make sure you get points for good reports regardless of whether the bug has been found already(in case multiple people find the same bug). No "firsties" or anything.
 
Comment by TaboriHK made on October 1st, 2009 at 3:36pm
God, I hope so. That sounds equally reasonable, actually.
 
Comment by Septentrion made on October 1st, 2009 at 12:01pm
Paying real money for in-game items or abilities on top of a paying for the game / subscription price is a terrible idea.

Those willing to spend more IRL money those spending the time to earn in-game money = Fail.
 
Comment by eria made on October 1st, 2009 at 1:16am
Thanks for the shout out!

So far, I have no issues with it. I also try to look at things from all angles, and I really think from a pure business stand point, a subscription/MT model makes a lot of sense. There are so many players who say they won't play this game because it will have a monthly fee, or they are upset that Bioware didn't make KOTOR 3. If it was f2p, what excuse would they have not to play? Bioware has gained a new player, who can potentially spend more money on the game, be it by eventually subscribing, or buying a few items here and there.

DDO has been doing well with their subscription/MT model, and I think we're going to start seeing it a lot more. We're already seeing more DLC in single player RPGs, I'm sure MMO developers see the potential profit wise they can gain from using similar models.

Just try to keep an open mind. We've been so used to monthly fees for so long, it's sometimes hard to think outside the box, but really try to think of it from a different angle.
 
Comment by RogueJedi86 made on October 6th, 2009 at 6:27am
Eria, the same people refusing to play TOR because it's not KotOR 3 are the same kind of people who refused to play WoW because it wasn't a formal Warcraft 4. But WoW got good enough, so those Warcraft 4 wishers eventually started playing WoW anyways. I feel the same can be done with TOR if they make it good enough.

And like I said in a post a minute ago, microtransaction games end up being too gimmicky. FreeRealms and others like it will never get as many players or as much mainstream appeal as WoW. Those kinds of games always end up falling into a niche that's mostly popular among broke children and the type of people who will pay money for random items. You just gotta do the monthly fee(and monthly fee ONLY) thing to get mainstream appeal. It's the much more economically sound, since it will keep more players in the long run, like "The Target Demographic Guy" said earlier.
 
Comment by TaboriHK made on October 1st, 2009 at 2:11pm
I general I find 'nickeling and diming' players to be in poor taste, if nothing else. I don't like the "meatloaf still tastes like meatloaf in the Matrix" philosophy. There is nothing wrong about keeping an open mind, but that includes being mindful of how the line of acceptability is being shifted. If we allow this to be commonplace, then the next step will be buying level advancement, or worse as I have seen on the 360, buying episodes for an incomplete game. This is very much becoming a Blizzard mentality: how can I get as much money as possible from the gamer? I do not want to have that relationship with a publisher for the sake of what I consider art. It puts a sour taste in my mouth.
 
Comment by thizzle made on September 30th, 2009 at 11:37pm
I really don't want micro-transactions for the game.. unless for a name change or server transfer but that's it!
 
Comment by STThreeTwoOne made on October 1st, 2009 at 2:37pm
I agree. If this game is mired with micro-transactions, I'm not playing. Peroid.
 
Comment by Spongy made on October 1st, 2009 at 7:09am
i agree.

i HATE microtransactions. a lot.

i would rather pay $20 a month than have MTs. Just give me one fee for everything.
Don't sell items, and don't have multiple subscription methods. Especially if those allow free to play how the economy works. EA may think they'll make more money, but it will just make the game worse which will end up makinging them less money in the long run (subscriber base won't grow).

I can see a weak company (like Atari/Cryptic) doing this (i.e. Champions Online); because they have no confidence in their product and having microtransactions makes a BAD first impression.
 
Comment by Spongy made on October 1st, 2009 at 7:19am
also, i'd like to point out that WoW has very minimal MTs (just for major services like server transfer or sex change (wtf lol))

and they have no trouble having a GINORMOUS subscriber base.

i think having free-to-play w/ in-game-items available through MT would be very bad for the game's growth profitability.
(not to mention making the game worse, causing fairness issues, making the economy unstable, and allowing tons of spammers and griefers access)

focus on making the game fun and it will be a huge success like WoW. try to go after ever segment (like the facebook flash gamers) and they will only make the game worse. people playing those flash games aren't going to suddenly jump into an MMO, and trying to change a MMO enough that it would appeal to them would just make it so bad nobody would want to play it.
 
Comment by RogueJedi86 made on October 6th, 2009 at 5:59am
I'll agree on that. If you want to be a "WoW killer", you gotta copy what it's done so well. All the microtransaction-based(or at least microtransaction featured) MMOs end up being too gimmicky for mainstream appeal, only getting a few hundred thousand players, mostly little kids. TOR doesn't need to fall into the gimmick-style MMO that other MT games like FreeRealms have fallen into.
 
Comment by Nonfactor made on September 30th, 2009 at 10:50pm
Way to not credit the site you got this info from.
 
Comment by TaboriHK made on October 1st, 2009 at 2:05pm
Even if it were from another site, which it demonstratively is not, does that site have a monopoly on making observations? I am not sure what the problem in this case could be, barring a copy-paste job, which isn't the case.
 
DH Team
Comment by sado made on September 30th, 2009 at 11:44pm
It originally came from a comment we received a couple hours after the beta application came online from a poster on our website named Eria. By the time the article went through the approval process and was posted it was 7pm EST today. As for 'stealing info' and not crediting - we never saw the article you mention and I am not sure how you can 'steal info' that comes from the official source. That would be like blaming us for posting any of the news that appears on their site or from a PR statement that some other site posts.

You can even see the replies we made to the original comment in the beta article:
http://darthhater.com/2009/09/29/its-here/ />
Note the time/date mark of the comment
eria said: 2009.09.30 00:38


Meaning posted on the 30th at 12:38AM Central, 29th at 11:38PM Eastern. Which is almost a full hour before the article you mention us 'not crediting' was posted. If anything I could also make the reverse argument with that information, that the website in question could have stolen the idea from a commenter on our website since it came almost a full hour after the comment was posted on our website. However, we would never do that as we don't make accusations as severe as plagiarism without ample proof.

Also at the time the official forum was still down and there was no way of knowing of any other articles that were similar that were posted on the forum. I did check every TOR website that I knew of before posting to make sure no one else had picked it up at the time. From our point of view the only sources of the information were A) the official website and B) a commenter on our website named Eria.
 
DH Team
Comment by Dover made on September 30th, 2009 at 11:39pm
I wrote this article from scratch after reviewing the terms of service and talking with some of the other writers at Darth Hater. If any information is used from another site we will give credit where credit is due.
 
Comment by JimtheJedi made on September 30th, 2009 at 10:25pm
Yep I agree with Axtoil, and I think the potential is their for them to do a combination of MicroTransactions or subscription. Those who want could pay fifteen dollars or so a month for all the content released that month and those who wanted could just do micro transactions for that sort of update. Guild Wars did this quite well.
 
Comment by Mindfields made on September 30th, 2009 at 8:23pm
Lawd, this is getting a bit frustrating. Wish they'd just come out with whatever system they are planning on using. Understand why they can't yet, just wish they could.
 
Comment by snafu made on September 30th, 2009 at 8:22pm
Was it confirmed in the gameplay demo that the in-game currency would be called "credits"?

Also, I personally hope micro-transactions are limited to vanity changes, but I'm sure Bioware will go with whatever system they project will earn them the most money.
 
Comment by Sithdestroyr25 made on September 30th, 2009 at 8:17pm
Hey I'm a idiot, what are micro-transactions?
 
DH Team
Comment by Zoidberg made on September 30th, 2009 at 8:27pm
Extra content you pay real money for beyond a subscription. An example would be buying items or server transfers. A proper link for you.
 
Comment by Axlotl made on September 30th, 2009 at 6:47pm
If they do micro-transactions, I hope they do it like Dungeons and Dragons Online is doing now. Free to play, pay micros to unlock extra content and/or items, or subscribe, and get access to all the micro-transaction stuff through the subscription, and you can readily switch between the 2 modes. I haven't patched my client yet, I subscribed to DDO 3 times in the past for a month or 2 for a break from WoW, but from what I've heard, their transaction system has been popularly received and very successful for them, on the scale of a smaller MMO like DDO at least.

Additionally, I can see 2 nice advantages to that system:

#1 is a nice advantage to the players: If you are suddenly busy you cancel your monthly sub, and go to micro-trans, but can still play on that odd day every now and then that you have time. Or, it could be like WoW is for me sometimes, after months unsubscribed, I'll have a sudden yearning to play some Arathi Basin or something, but not enough to spend 15 dollars on a what would amount to only a few days playing again. This is also a bonus for Bioware, because maybe that nagging yearn to play a few matches of PvP blooms into a full on relapse into addiction.

#2, for Bioware: If the game has a rough start, with bugs and server issues, being free to play means that someone who is curious a couple months down the line can just log right back in and see that everything is running better.
 
Comment by Team made on September 30th, 2009 at 6:42pm
i see no problem yet. as long as the micro-transactions are for vanity items its all good. to bring the obligatory wow example they have microtransactions for vanity items disguised in their trading card game.
 
Comment by RogueJedi86 made on October 5th, 2009 at 6:41pm
Vanity items are very valuable to Roleplayers though, so making such items require real money is a bit unfair to the roleplayers. SWG wouldn't have been half as popular if you'd been forced to spend real money on the great deal of clothing and character customization you get from Image Designers. You gotta be fair to the RPers too.
 
Comment by Macsimus made on October 6th, 2009 at 8:52am
Amen to this man. I'm not an RP'er myself, but people act like vanity items have no value. There's a poll on the official TOR forums that puts lack character customization in 2nd place, in a long list of things that would ruin the game for them. A large group of people would be royally pissed if they had to dish out extra money for cosmetic items. Let's face it no one wants to be walking around with cookie cutter classes, so looking different than the rest is a very big deal to some.
 
Comment by Axlotl made on September 30th, 2009 at 6:50pm
The card game stuff is like paying for a micro that is completely random and possible just nothing.

Unless I'm mistaken and the loot cards are no longer random pulls, but that would really surprise me.

Funny thing with the WoW CCG, is I LOVE CCGs/TCGs like Magic and Star Wars, along with a metric crap-load of other CCGs, and I subscribe to WoW, yet I've never felt the slightest urge to actually buy any WoW CCG cards.
 
DH Team
Comment by Dover made on September 30th, 2009 at 6:53pm
I still have the first 4 complete sets of the original Star Wars CCG, I loved those cards as a kid
 
Comment by Axlotl made on September 30th, 2009 at 7:17pm
I started right around the time Decipher lost the license to Wizards of the Coast, and they made their crappy Dice-based Star Wars TCG.

The 2 games are on such opposite sides of the spectrum.
 
Comment by Zenkei made on September 30th, 2009 at 7:13pm
I always wanted to play, but never bothered learning how. lol