I can't think of any mmo that has retained 75% upwards for the past 8 years. Wow is the exception to the rule.
The idea that swtor in its current state could hope to have a retention above 25% is silly, but then it is silly to think swtor would remain in its current state.
I think they will either pull out some amasing patches, fixing issues with the hero engine and the pvp sphere, as well as their endgame pve, or they will end up looking silly indeed.
I would personally think that any retention rate above 30-40 percent is very good. New people come and go. Subcribers quit and new people subscribe. A successful game (subscription wise) is able to steadily grow the numbers. I would expect significant decrease after the initial month is out, as large number of people will not continue subscriptions (75-90% retention rate is pure fantasy). However, the medium to long term success does not depend on this as much as people would like to think. I would say the first 2 months are not a good indication of the performance of the game, unless it is really lacking like FF XIV.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
Pratcher is in full damage control mode right now with EA investors, its their necks in the noose right now along with Ritciello's. 75-90% is pretty much a wet dream, I expect some of the sharks to pounce on this monday morning. The short sellers will be at the point.
Considering the cost, if not handled correctly, this game could be the end of EA and, considering the quality of the game, a lot of people (like me) didn't pass the first month. I believe (as it was said previously) that they are on full PR / Damage control / Chase the rabbit mode, trying to stop the ship from going titanic.
We'll see how they can convince their investors that it's ok to get no ROI at all, especially nowadays.
You're a Hardcore Survivor!
You not only survived the zombie apocalypse, but did it with style! Your mastery of zombie knowledge, survival tactics, and weaponry is nearly unmatched. Congratulations, for you are hardcore!
Considering the cost, if not handled correctly, this game could be the end of EA and, considering the quality of the game, a lot of people (like me) didn't pass the first month. I believe (as it was said previously) that they are on full PR / Damage control / Chase the rabbit mode, trying to stop the ship from going titanic.
We'll see how they can convince their investors that it's ok to get no ROI at all, especially nowadays.
With what math?
If the development cost was 200m, they have nearly recovered that already. Whether the jaded MMO players will play it in long-term has very little impact. Will it be a financial success like WoW, unlikely, but then again no other MMO has been. Will it be profitable in the future? No doubt.
The biggest impact of lack of profitability could have is the future development efforts. If the game is successful, they will keep a bigger development team for it. If it is not profitable, it will be kept a float, but the main development moves to greener pastures.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
With those unrealistic analyst expectations, EA stock is going to get creamed when the game falls short of the heightened expectations. I think the analysts just wanted to buy time for their clients who invested in EA will have time to sell before the stock drops.
Considering the cost, if not handled correctly, this game could be the end of EA and, considering the quality of the game, a lot of people (like me) didn't pass the first month. I believe (as it was said previously) that they are on full PR / Damage control / Chase the rabbit mode, trying to stop the ship from going titanic.
We'll see how they can convince their investors that it's ok to get no ROI at all, especially nowadays.
With what math?
If the development cost was 200m, they have nearly recovered that already. Whether the jaded MMO players will play it in long-term has very little impact. Will it be a financial success like WoW, unlikely, but then again no other MMO has been. Will it be profitable in the future? No doubt.
The biggest impact of lack of profitability could have is the future development efforts. If the game is successful, they will keep a bigger development team for it. If it is not profitable, it will be kept a float, but the main development moves to greener pastures.
Could you explain your math?
Let us say EA sold 2 million boxes and got 70% of that as I think the shops might want to get some money too?
Should be about 80 million
Then they sold 1 million boxes digitally Another 60 million
Then let us assume 100% of their 3 million players subb should be about 45 million
So yes they might have made heir money back, though I really doubt it
Gaming is getting too expensive. I'm not making anymore sub purchases, SWTOR is no exception. Austerity measures are forcing me to get rid of even WoW, but I won't miss it. F2P will be all I will consider latter half of 2012 and that I feel too is a luxury, and people more hard up than me won't even do the F2P thing and put games lower down the priority list as reality wrecks the world economy and peoples meagre spare cash. No hysterics, just how things are in the western world right now, and the EU is heading into total meltdown. USA is in a worser position with its debt ceiling but for now is ignoring it. Bah.
Considering the cost, if not handled correctly, this game could be the end of EA and, considering the quality of the game, a lot of people (like me) didn't pass the first month. I believe (as it was said previously) that they are on full PR / Damage control / Chase the rabbit mode, trying to stop the ship from going titanic.
We'll see how they can convince their investors that it's ok to get no ROI at all, especially nowadays.
EA has bombed time and time again...they buy high and are forced to sell low and they some how have managed to stick around,baffling.... but they always do.
Considering the cost, if not handled correctly, this game could be the end of EA and, considering the quality of the game, a lot of people (like me) didn't pass the first month. I believe (as it was said previously) that they are on full PR / Damage control / Chase the rabbit mode, trying to stop the ship from going titanic.
We'll see how they can convince their investors that it's ok to get no ROI at all, especially nowadays.
With what math?
If the development cost was 200m, they have nearly recovered that already. Whether the jaded MMO players will play it in long-term has very little impact. Will it be a financial success like WoW, unlikely, but then again no other MMO has been. Will it be profitable in the future? No doubt.
The biggest impact of lack of profitability could have is the future development efforts. If the game is successful, they will keep a bigger development team for it. If it is not profitable, it will be kept a float, but the main development moves to greener pastures.
Could you explain your math?
Let us say EA sold 2 million boxes and got 70% of that as I think the shops might want to get some money too?
Should be about 80 million
Then they sold 1 million boxes digitally Another 60 million
Then let us assume 100% of their 3 million players subb should be about 45 million
So yes they might have made heir money back, though I really doubt it
What's with people just making up numbers? I'm pretty sure none of you have any idea what percentage of a box sale translates into profit, after all is said and done. I mean really, no idea. Just throwing guesses out there, and then adding them up? That's not even an estimate, it's just silly.
Oh, and LOL @ at the idea that it could be the end of EA if TOR tanks. As much as I'd love to see that happen, not a chance. EA is huge. TOR could cost 500 million, only to go the way of Auto Assault, and it'd hardly put a dent in their overall success as a company.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Considering the cost, if not handled correctly, this game could be the end of EA and, considering the quality of the game, a lot of people (like me) didn't pass the first month. I believe (as it was said previously) that they are on full PR / Damage control / Chase the rabbit mode, trying to stop the ship from going titanic.
We'll see how they can convince their investors that it's ok to get no ROI at all, especially nowadays.
With what math?
If the development cost was 200m, they have nearly recovered that already. Whether the jaded MMO players will play it in long-term has very little impact. Will it be a financial success like WoW, unlikely, but then again no other MMO has been. Will it be profitable in the future? No doubt.
The biggest impact of lack of profitability could have is the future development efforts. If the game is successful, they will keep a bigger development team for it. If it is not profitable, it will be kept a float, but the main development moves to greener pastures.
Could you explain your math?
Let us say EA sold 2 million boxes and got 70% of that as I think the shops might want to get some money too?
Should be about 80 million
Then they sold 1 million boxes digitally Another 60 million
Then let us assume 100% of their 3 million players subb should be about 45 million
So yes they might have made heir money back, though I really doubt it
You assume that the box sales suddenly stops and that there will be only one patch of subcribers. The fact is that they continue to sell digital versions and boxes. Even if only 20-30 percent of those continue subscription after first month, they will recover the development cost very quickly. After that the running cost is relatively small. The real cost will be in further development and marketing, along with the fact that they probably have to give bulk of profits to Lucas Arts.
They might not have made their many back yet, but I would expect them to make it back in a very short period. Like I said "nearly recovered". And they nearly recovered it with the initial sales.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
If the development cost was 200m, they have nearly recovered that already. Whether the jaded MMO players will play it in long-term has very little impact. Will it be a financial success like WoW, unlikely, but then again no other MMO has been. Will it be profitable in the future? No doubt.
The biggest impact of lack of profitability could have is the future development efforts. If the game is successful, they will keep a bigger development team for it. If it is not profitable, it will be kept a float, but the main development moves to greener pastures.
Well, your math interests me. Let's say they sold 2M boxes at $60, that's $120M. Let's say that there are no overhead costs at all or that the extra profit on CE editions makes up for that, we're being optimistic here. LA get 35 cents to the dollar, so that leaves $80M rounded up. How does that recover a $200M investment?
Let's say that those 2M all pay another 3 months worth at $15 a month (yep 100% retention rate, and EA hasn't even announced 2M TOR accounts yet), that's another $90M, leaving EA/BW another $60M and they're still haven't recovered the cost. And this is a really overly optimistic scenario.They will have a hard time breaking even anytime soon, let alone turn a profit.
I'd guess that they really need those subs to break even, they need them for a long time too. If they didn't this game would be B2P.
Every game have lost subs after the first month, EVERY SINGLE ONE!
Some thought it would be something else...
Some just got bored...
Some who got problems with running the game, due to either software, hardware or both....
And for a ton of other reasons.
But it's no different from every other game.
Everyone here painting hell on the wall, should chill the **** out, sit back, and wait til there's some real numbers out there.
Right now ya'll are discussing it's failures based on some of the hardcore SW / BW fans who decided to quit it, for whatever reason, that's not a fair representation of the rest of the gamers in that game.
I agree that the analysts are nothing to go by, their guess is as good as anyone elses...
But if we measure fail in how much they make in $ compared to how much spend, then I really don't think you'll have to worry all that much, they will have have bread on their tables tomorrow, and most likely, will be washing it down with wine.
Considering the cost, if not handled correctly, this game could be the end of EA and, considering the quality of the game, a lot of people (like me) didn't pass the first month. I believe (as it was said previously) that they are on full PR / Damage control / Chase the rabbit mode, trying to stop the ship from going titanic.
We'll see how they can convince their investors that it's ok to get no ROI at all, especially nowadays.
With what math?
If the development cost was 200m, they have nearly recovered that already. Whether the jaded MMO players will play it in long-term has very little impact. Will it be a financial success like WoW, unlikely, but then again no other MMO has been. Will it be profitable in the future? No doubt.
The biggest impact of lack of profitability could have is the future development efforts. If the game is successful, they will keep a bigger development team for it. If it is not profitable, it will be kept a float, but the main development moves to greener pastures.
Could you explain your math?
Let us say EA sold 2 million boxes and got 70% of that as I think the shops might want to get some money too?
Should be about 80 million
Then they sold 1 million boxes digitally Another 60 million
Then let us assume 100% of their 3 million players subb should be about 45 million
So yes they might have made heir money back, though I really doubt it
You assume that the box sales suddenly stops and that there will be only one patch of subcribers. The fact is that they continue to sell digital versions and boxes. Even if only 20-30 percent of those continue subscription after first month, they will recover the development cost very quickly. After that the running cost is relatively small. The real cost will be in further development and marketing, along with the fact that they probably have to give bulk of profits to Lucas Arts.
They might not have made their many back yet, but I would expect them to make it back in a very short period. Like I said "nearly recovered". And they nearly recovered it with the initial sales.
If you are counting that EA gets 100% of the box/digital price, that's wrong. Publisher gets 30% of that, and has to pay publishing costs and advestisments and Bioware (25% of that 30%) so from 60$ for copy they get 10$, that's 20M for 2M copies, how is that near recovered from sales 200M? They just recovered 10%, counting 2M sales, which it has not reached yet.
If you are counting that EA gets 100% of the box/digital price, that's wrong. Publisher gets 30% of that, and has to pay publishing costs and advestisments and Bioware (25% of that 30%) so from 60$ for copy they get 10$, that's 20M for 2M copies, how is that near recovered from sales 200M? They just recovered 10%, counting 2M sales, which it has not reached yet.
EA is the publisher. Bioware is a part of EA.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
I'm no analyst, but I am an a guy with no knowledge of business that likes to pretend I do when I post on forums. So I think I have some insight into this.
I think 75-90% is too high. Even Warcraft (a game that had 4-5 million million players in NA/EU at one point) is a shadow of its former self. I don't know if people are getting tired of this genre or if it's the economy, too many decent F2P games out now, or whatever, but if Warcraft (arguably the easiest to learn/simple to play MMORPG ever created) can't retain subs, I don't see others doing it.
If you are counting that EA gets 100% of the box/digital price, that's wrong. Publisher gets 30% of that, and has to pay publishing costs and advestisments and Bioware (25% of that 30%) so from 60$ for copy they get 10$, that's 20M for 2M copies, how is that near recovered from sales 200M? They just recovered 10%, counting 2M sales, which it has not reached yet.
EA is the publisher. Bioware is a part of EA.
Actually if you look closer you'll find Lucasarts is the publisher.
This thread is all just absurd speculation.
Actually both Lucas Arts and EA are publishers. Lucas Arts is listed ofc because its their license.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
Personally I dont care about what they spent what they made I am just hopeful that they are successful. Only the LA time NY times etc socialist newspapers start nadanada about money If they bought autos and nice one so what I dont envy them Im glad and happy that they can do it is any skin off of your arse if they did??
I did not read the OP or the thread. Analysts predict a lot of things. If something sounds kind of ridiculous, it is probably "REDICULOUS!" Especially when an analyst says it.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Dont be so surprised about that, manipulations starting with reviews and dont hold with news about stocks. Stock manipulation is very well known, there are chances to succeed but its a ripp off aswell in certain situations.
Of course they play the trumpet right now, so people invest and of course they will tell you that the game will succeed bla bla blubb......
Dont be so surprised about that, manipulations starting with reviews and dont hold with news about stocks. Stock manipulation is very well known, there are chances to succeed but its a ripp off aswell in certain situations.
Of course they play the trumpet right now, so people invest and of course they will tell you that the game will succeed bla bla blubb......
There is no free market its manipulated !
Any analyst that gets this wrong by a large amount is going to take a large hit on his/her credibility.
In the financial market, your credibility is all you got.
Michael Patchter (probably the most famous analyst) gets a lot of things right which is why people keep on going back to him.
Yeah, he was off on the Wii-HD prediction but it made a lot of sense business-wise, and financial people agree that Nintendo should have done what Patchter was saying.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Dont be so surprised about that, manipulations starting with reviews and dont hold with news about stocks. Stock manipulation is very well known, there are chances to succeed but its a ripp off aswell in certain situations.
Of course they play the trumpet right now, so people invest and of course they will tell you that the game will succeed bla bla blubb......
There is no free market its manipulated !
Any analyst that gets this wrong by a large amount is going to take a large hit on his/her credibility.
In the financial market, your credibility is all you got.
Michael Patchter (probably the most famous analyst) gets a lot of things right which is why people keep on going back to him.
Yeah, he was off on the Wii-HD prediction but it made a lot of sense business-wise, and financial people agree that Nintendo should have done what Patchter was saying.
"City Boy", Geraint Anderson who was a high ranked Analyst is just one example out of many. He was telling a lot about stock market manipulation in a documentary. Its maybe eye opening for some.
with the amount of money spent on this game it should be much better, they have made mistakes that devs made 10 years ago even though technology has advanced hugely in that time. They can only get 100 people in a zone before it starts to turn into a slide show..complete amateurs. bioware may be good at making linear single player rpgs but that doesn't translate well into an mmo. swtor is probably the worst mmo i have bought.
I didn't rush to 50 and burn myself out by playing this thing for twelve hours a day, so I'll be sticking with it past my free month.
Important facts: 1. Free to Play games are poorly made. 2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals. 3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE. 4. Community is more important than you think.
Comments
I can't think of any mmo that has retained 75% upwards for the past 8 years. Wow is the exception to the rule.
The idea that swtor in its current state could hope to have a retention above 25% is silly, but then it is silly to think swtor would remain in its current state.
I think they will either pull out some amasing patches, fixing issues with the hero engine and the pvp sphere, as well as their endgame pve, or they will end up looking silly indeed.
You do remember that few years ago we were informed that only about 30 percent of players get past level 10 in WoW.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/98245-Only-30-Percent-of-WoW-Players-Get-Past-Level-10
I would personally think that any retention rate above 30-40 percent is very good. New people come and go. Subcribers quit and new people subscribe. A successful game (subscription wise) is able to steadily grow the numbers. I would expect significant decrease after the initial month is out, as large number of people will not continue subscriptions (75-90% retention rate is pure fantasy). However, the medium to long term success does not depend on this as much as people would like to think. I would say the first 2 months are not a good indication of the performance of the game, unless it is really lacking like FF XIV.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
Pratcher is in full damage control mode right now with EA investors, its their necks in the noose right now along with Ritciello's. 75-90% is pretty much a wet dream, I expect some of the sharks to pounce on this monday morning. The short sellers will be at the point.
Considering the cost, if not handled correctly, this game could be the end of EA and, considering the quality of the game, a lot of people (like me) didn't pass the first month. I believe (as it was said previously) that they are on full PR / Damage control / Chase the rabbit mode, trying to stop the ship from going titanic.
We'll see how they can convince their investors that it's ok to get no ROI at all, especially nowadays.
You're a Hardcore Survivor!
You not only survived the zombie apocalypse, but did it with style! Your mastery of zombie knowledge, survival tactics, and weaponry is nearly unmatched. Congratulations, for you are hardcore!
With what math?
If the development cost was 200m, they have nearly recovered that already. Whether the jaded MMO players will play it in long-term has very little impact. Will it be a financial success like WoW, unlikely, but then again no other MMO has been. Will it be profitable in the future? No doubt.
The biggest impact of lack of profitability could have is the future development efforts. If the game is successful, they will keep a bigger development team for it. If it is not profitable, it will be kept a float, but the main development moves to greener pastures.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
With those unrealistic analyst expectations, EA stock is going to get creamed when the game falls short of the heightened expectations. I think the analysts just wanted to buy time for their clients who invested in EA will have time to sell before the stock drops.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Could you explain your math?
Let us say EA sold 2 million boxes and got 70% of that as I think the shops might want to get some money too?
Should be about 80 million
Then they sold 1 million boxes digitally Another 60 million
Then let us assume 100% of their 3 million players subb should be about 45 million
So yes they might have made heir money back, though I really doubt it
Gaming is getting too expensive. I'm not making anymore sub purchases, SWTOR is no exception. Austerity measures are forcing me to get rid of even WoW, but I won't miss it. F2P will be all I will consider latter half of 2012 and that I feel too is a luxury, and people more hard up than me won't even do the F2P thing and put games lower down the priority list as reality wrecks the world economy and peoples meagre spare cash. No hysterics, just how things are in the western world right now, and the EU is heading into total meltdown. USA is in a worser position with its debt ceiling but for now is ignoring it. Bah.
EA has bombed time and time again...they buy high and are forced to sell low and they some how have managed to stick around,baffling.... but they always do.
i think this is more of the same for EA...
What's with people just making up numbers? I'm pretty sure none of you have any idea what percentage of a box sale translates into profit, after all is said and done. I mean really, no idea. Just throwing guesses out there, and then adding them up? That's not even an estimate, it's just silly.
Oh, and LOL @ at the idea that it could be the end of EA if TOR tanks. As much as I'd love to see that happen, not a chance. EA is huge. TOR could cost 500 million, only to go the way of Auto Assault, and it'd hardly put a dent in their overall success as a company.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
You assume that the box sales suddenly stops and that there will be only one patch of subcribers. The fact is that they continue to sell digital versions and boxes. Even if only 20-30 percent of those continue subscription after first month, they will recover the development cost very quickly. After that the running cost is relatively small. The real cost will be in further development and marketing, along with the fact that they probably have to give bulk of profits to Lucas Arts.
They might not have made their many back yet, but I would expect them to make it back in a very short period. Like I said "nearly recovered". And they nearly recovered it with the initial sales.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
Well, your math interests me. Let's say they sold 2M boxes at $60, that's $120M. Let's say that there are no overhead costs at all or that the extra profit on CE editions makes up for that, we're being optimistic here. LA get 35 cents to the dollar, so that leaves $80M rounded up. How does that recover a $200M investment?
Let's say that those 2M all pay another 3 months worth at $15 a month (yep 100% retention rate, and EA hasn't even announced 2M TOR accounts yet), that's another $90M, leaving EA/BW another $60M and they're still haven't recovered the cost. And this is a really overly optimistic scenario.They will have a hard time breaking even anytime soon, let alone turn a profit.
I'd guess that they really need those subs to break even, they need them for a long time too. If they didn't this game would be B2P.
You guys put way to much weight into this.
Every game have lost subs after the first month, EVERY SINGLE ONE!
Some thought it would be something else...
Some just got bored...
Some who got problems with running the game, due to either software, hardware or both....
And for a ton of other reasons.
But it's no different from every other game.
Everyone here painting hell on the wall, should chill the **** out, sit back, and wait til there's some real numbers out there.
Right now ya'll are discussing it's failures based on some of the hardcore SW / BW fans who decided to quit it, for whatever reason, that's not a fair representation of the rest of the gamers in that game.
I agree that the analysts are nothing to go by, their guess is as good as anyone elses...
But if we measure fail in how much they make in $ compared to how much spend, then I really don't think you'll have to worry all that much, they will have have bread on their tables tomorrow, and most likely, will be washing it down with wine.
If you are counting that EA gets 100% of the box/digital price, that's wrong. Publisher gets 30% of that, and has to pay publishing costs and advestisments and Bioware (25% of that 30%) so from 60$ for copy they get 10$, that's 20M for 2M copies, how is that near recovered from sales 200M? They just recovered 10%, counting 2M sales, which it has not reached yet.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
EA is the publisher. Bioware is a part of EA.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
I'm no analyst, but I am an a guy with no knowledge of business that likes to pretend I do when I post on forums. So I think I have some insight into this.
I think 75-90% is too high. Even Warcraft (a game that had 4-5 million million players in NA/EU at one point) is a shadow of its former self. I don't know if people are getting tired of this genre or if it's the economy, too many decent F2P games out now, or whatever, but if Warcraft (arguably the easiest to learn/simple to play MMORPG ever created) can't retain subs, I don't see others doing it.
Actually both Lucas Arts and EA are publishers. Lucas Arts is listed ofc because its their license.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
Personally I dont care about what they spent what they made I am just hopeful that they are successful. Only the LA time NY times etc socialist newspapers start nadanada about money If they bought autos and nice one so what I dont envy them Im glad and happy that they can do it is any skin off of your arse if they did??
I did not read the OP or the thread. Analysts predict a lot of things. If something sounds kind of ridiculous, it is probably "REDICULOUS!" Especially when an analyst says it.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Dont be so surprised about that, manipulations starting with reviews and dont hold with news about stocks. Stock manipulation is very well known, there are chances to succeed but its a ripp off aswell in certain situations.
Of course they play the trumpet right now, so people invest and of course they will tell you that the game will succeed bla bla blubb......
There is no free market its manipulated !
Any analyst that gets this wrong by a large amount is going to take a large hit on his/her credibility.
In the financial market, your credibility is all you got.
Michael Patchter (probably the most famous analyst) gets a lot of things right which is why people keep on going back to him.
Yeah, he was off on the Wii-HD prediction but it made a lot of sense business-wise, and financial people agree that Nintendo should have done what Patchter was saying.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
I have water retention rate of about 5%
"City Boy", Geraint Anderson who was a high ranked Analyst is just one example out of many. He was telling a lot about stock market manipulation in a documentary. Its maybe eye opening for some.
http://www.financedocumentaries.com/2011/06/cityboy-secrets-of-investment-bankers.html
with the amount of money spent on this game it should be much better, they have made mistakes that devs made 10 years ago even though technology has advanced hugely in that time. They can only get 100 people in a zone before it starts to turn into a slide show..complete amateurs. bioware may be good at making linear single player rpgs but that doesn't translate well into an mmo. swtor is probably the worst mmo i have bought.
I didn't rush to 50 and burn myself out by playing this thing for twelve hours a day, so I'll be sticking with it past my free month.
Important facts:
1. Free to Play games are poorly made.
2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals.
3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE.
4. Community is more important than you think.