Originally Posted by
Morros
This is what I don't get. Let's say for example, you used to play TOR when it launched. You bought the box, played for four months, paying 3 monthly subscriptions. Then you stopped playing, so you stopped paying. So essentially your status is "No money out of pocket/No access to game." Which is a fair trade-off and I don't think back when it was a subscription only model anyone expected to be able to play this game without paying a monthly subscription.
TOR goes F2P. The same guy who used to play, now takes another look at TOR, and decides he wants to try F2P.
He rejoins the game, but he does not have the same access to his account that he did when he paid a monthly subscription. However, he has far more access now, than he had before the F2P. Then he complains that he feels more restricted, even though before F2P he had absolutely NO access at all, which is the ultimate restriction, and when he did have access, he was paying the monthly subscription fee.
Basically, looking at them as restrictions is the the wrong way to look at it, instead look it TOR F2P as a bonus now, since you have a ton of access to it, without having to pay a monthly fee. If you want the whole thing, pay the monthly fee, but if you don't want to pay a monthly fee, don't complain about being restricted, when in fact, you're getting more for nothing than you were before F2P was launched.