dont forget thos are sales and subs become to drop in hte first month even bioware ananunce than 800k acc was in the total of all servers wish mean they dont even have 1 million pp playing right now and that info was 1 week ago
the game wills tilld rop (im not hater) and when gw 2 came out lot of p2p games will be drop by half as expected,also tor is not worth be p2p tahst the reason icancell mi subs even gw 1 still betetr and i would pay x that game but guess what? is fre and tahst how it suposed to be .
Originally posted by JoeyMMO Originally posted by lizardbones If you use VGChartz.com's sales numbers, and assume that everyone who buys a box is a player for 4 weeks, and then after the 4 weeks they may jet, you can work out a pseudo retention rate.
This image is the worksheet:
Some things to note: * Retention Rates only affect the first and second week's sales. All sales after the first week or two are by default a 100% retention rate. * If 78% of the people who bought the game the first two weeks stuck around, we get very close to 1.7 million players.
I think you're assuming that people start playing the week they bought the game. Since the 1Mth players annoucement came at around than the 1.5M sales date, it's safe to say that a considerably larger amount of players might still in their first month than you're assuming. Your retention rate is very pseudo, in fact it's highly improbable it's as high as your guessing.
I made several assumptions. 1) EA isn't lying. 2) VGChartz numbers are at least close to reality. 3) Anyone who isn't up to the 1 month point is counted as a player, regardless of whether they're playing or not. 4) Everyone who bought the game actually started playing or registered the game when they bought a box.
I was just showing that a 78% retention rate could yield 1.7 million players, and also that the majority of the players had paid for play time beyond the first month of time included in the game's purchase.
We're all using numbers that are better than using XFire stats, but we're all still guessing. When all you know is 1 number, you can create several scenarios that yield that number. Until EA releases actual retention rates, and then defines what those retention rates mean, we don't know much beyond what they've said on Feb. 1.
Also, I do a lot of boring stuff with spreadsheets at work. This was a chance to do something at least marginally interesting (compared to work).
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
This soon after an MMO launches, active subs aren't a good indicator of anything. I don't know how long the average person holds onto a sub, how many drop before the first month is up, how many pay for one extra month, two, or three.. I think the real indicator isn't subs, but how active the servers are. How many people are actually logging in and playing. People tend to taper off, before they go and cancel. It always takes a few months, but at first, you can see the trend in how actively people are playing, not how actively they're subscribing.
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.
This soon after an MMO launches, active subs aren't a good indicator of anything. I don't know how long the average person holds onto a sub, how many drop before the first month is up, how many pay for one extra month, two, or three.. I think the real indicator isn't subs, but how active the servers are. How many people are actually logging in and playing. People tend to taper off, before they go and cancel. It always takes a few months, but at first, you can see the trend in how actively people are playing, not how actively they're subscribing.
^ it's still amazing how much people think the first few months matter as long as the game plays at launch(IE not completely broken like FFXIV). The majority of people will play for a few months and quit look at rift huge numbers right off the bat then around months 3-6 huge drop offs. Once people get through a few stories and hit 50 I bet you a huge drop off will start. Numbers now are meaningless and honestly look at little low considering how big star wars is and how big of a name bioware is. But in a game centered around a single player story and offering nothing new endgame wise that hasn't been out for the last decade I just don't see how people believe this game isn't going to go into a huge decline in the coming months...
I quit after my one month expired. I left my 44 lvl character because the game was too glitchuy, customer service was non-existent and pretty bad when they did reply, the pvp was repetitive and monotonous (3 unchanging arenas? really?) and the game became too grindy! Also, there is no worthy endgame content
The 1.7 million subscriber number as of February 1st doesn't make sense based on actual populations. I'm still wondering if the CEO was referring to the numbers as of 12/31 and calling them current as in the current report rather than the current day.
The sales figures are great, but the retention numbers seem way too high as of 2/1.
Anyway, I guess the next quarterly report will be less confusing.
The 1.7 million subscriber number as of February 1st doesn't make sense based on actual populations. I'm still wondering if the CEO was referring to the numbers as of 12/31 and calling them current as in the current report rather than the current day.
The sales figures are great, but the retention numbers seem way too high as of 2/1.
Anyway, I guess the next quarterly report will be less confusing.
From the statement:
"Star Wars®: The Old Republic™ has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through
more than 2 million units in a little over one month."
There was no confusion there. Even in the statement it was clear they were not talking about Dec 31s which was 11 days from launch, not a little over a month.
You also can't judge based on in game populations, after the initial rush people log in less, this is normal. I doesn't mean they don't maintain a sub or didn't sub for 3, 6 or 12 months.
The 1.7 million subscriber number as of February 1st doesn't make sense based on actual populations. I'm still wondering if the CEO was referring to the numbers as of 12/31 and calling them current as in the current report rather than the current day.
The sales figures are great, but the retention numbers seem way too high as of 2/1.
Anyway, I guess the next quarterly report will be less confusing.
From the statement:
"Star Wars®: The Old Republic™ has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through
more than 2 million units in a little over one month."
There was no confusion there. Even in the statement it was clear they were not talking about Dec 31s which was 11 days from launch, not a little over a month.
You also can't judge based on in game populations, after the initial rush people log in less, this is normal. I doesn't mean they don't maintain a sub or didn't sub for 3, 6 or 12 months.
Let me note that I'm not saying you are wrong, but:
That quote is vague enough to be read multiple ways. They consider active subscribers differently than WOW as they force you to register for a plan in order to play. They also say '1.7 million active subscribers ... in a little over one month" which would also be accurate if they counted all of the subscribers during that time "over one month", rather than the number of subscribers on a certain date "on February 1st".
Blizzard most likely counts subscribers during a quarter as anyone that had an active subscription for as little as one day during that quarter.
The 1.7 million subscriber number as of February 1st doesn't make sense based on actual populations. I'm still wondering if the CEO was referring to the numbers as of 12/31 and calling them current as in the current report rather than the current day.
The sales figures are great, but the retention numbers seem way too high as of 2/1.
Anyway, I guess the next quarterly report will be less confusing.
From the statement:
"Star Wars®: The Old Republic™ has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through
more than 2 million units in a little over one month."
There was no confusion there. Even in the statement it was clear they were not talking about Dec 31s which was 11 days from launch, not a little over a month.
You also can't judge based on in game populations, after the initial rush people log in less, this is normal. I doesn't mean they don't maintain a sub or didn't sub for 3, 6 or 12 months.
Let me note that I'm not saying you are wrong, but:
That quote is vague enough to be read multiple ways. They consider active subscribers differently than WOW as they force you to register for a plan in order to play. They also say '1.7 million active subscribers ... in a little over one month" which would also be accurate if they counted all of the subscribers during that time "over one month", rather than the number of subscribers on a certain date "on February 1st".
Blizzard most likely counts subscribers during a quarter as anyone that had an active subscription for as little as one day during that quarter.
They announced on Dec 27th thay they had 1 million accounts created. Do you think they sold 700k copies in the next 4 days?
Well that's that. My friend decided after all this time that he "hates" this game. lol. He's tired of laggy pvp, no endgame content, and not having the ability to choose what gear to spend your "valor" on (not sure what he means since I haven't been to lvl 50 - he "keeps getting the same belt"). He said the story is good but it's not enough to keep a turd afloat. It's about time... the only thing that sucks is he didn't decide this before my free month was up, now I'm going to be counted in that first paid month too. I think.
I quit after my one month expired. I left my 44 lvl character because the game was too glitchuy, customer service was non-existent and pretty bad when they did reply, the pvp was repetitive and monotonous (3 unchanging arenas? really?) and the game became too grindy! Also, there is no worthy endgame content
Welcome to MMos. I am sorry your stay was unpleasent, but I understand that people sometimes do not like the genre. I hope that SWTOR didn't leave a bad taste in your mouth, and I hope you enjoy your continued play on console games.
The 1.7 million subscriber number as of February 1st doesn't make sense based on actual populations. I'm still wondering if the CEO was referring to the numbers as of 12/31 and calling them current as in the current report rather than the current day.
The sales figures are great, but the retention numbers seem way too high as of 2/1.
Anyway, I guess the next quarterly report will be less confusing.
They are, as that is what they were legaly bound to report on. Not after dec 31st.
The amount of people that actually actively subscribed after January 20th will be in the next report.
There is no way in hell they retained 85% of their playbase. I'd bet mylife on that. In fact I'd bet right - today as of now, this game has more like 1.2 million subs and has lost upwards of 750k since release. That means they have seen 45% loss in players since the games release.
I doubt they've retained 85% too, but I can well believe they've got 1.7m players as TOR still seems to be selling pretty well.
They havent actually said anything about the retention rate, and if it was close to even 80% they would probably be very loud about that since it would be an amazing number.
What they said (IIRC) was that "the majority" of the 1.7m have paid a sub fee, the rest are in their free month still. And I doubt we'll ever get any information more specific than that.
Actualy when asked by an investor during the earnings call Gibeau specificaly stated that he "CAN'T" say the majority of those 1.7 million paid thier sub fee rather then being in thier free month. Most people are assuming he mispoke or was misquoted in the transcript because he went on to describe that as positive evidence of the game doing well in his next sentance.... so "CAN'T" really wouldn't make much sense in that context. However I wouldn't be entirely sure about that. You are only legaly responsible for what you actualy say during an earnings call...not how someone might interpret what you said (if the interpretation was contrary to your actual words)... in any event, time will tell with TOR... 4-6 months down the road everyone should have a much clearer picture of it's retention and long term health.
Actualy, the exact words that Gibeau used were "I can't tell you that the majority of the 1.7 million are paying subscribers for us currently, which is great considering"
"can't" as in CAN NOT. Now it's entirely possible he mispoke and meant "can"....but he's only able to be held accountable for what he ACTUALY said...not what someone might ASSUME he meant to say.
Another thing that I would wonder about which could effect numbers...were there any MULTI-MONTH deals offered with the game? or Multi-Month game cards purchased.
I know when I purchased LOTRO a few years back, I signed up for a 90 day subscription deal right off the bat, and I know people that have bought 60 day game cards for games as well. Something like that can play havoc with trying to estimate long term retention numbers....as those folks essentialy paid up front.
It's even tougher with games that sell LifeTime subscriptions or FTP for that matter as every one of those accounts permanently counts as an "Active" subscription, even if they haven't played in 3 years . Obviously that's not a problem in this case....but people that buy the game on day one and immediately sign up for a multi-month sub...or input a multi-month game card...can definately throw a monkey wrench in trying to figure how many players a game really is able to retain in the long haul.
Wow, just noticed that.
I'm pretty sure that is a typo in the transcript though because he goes on to say "which is great considering we're only, like I said, 42 days into the launch, and you have a 30-day trial period."
Yes, one would tend to ASSUME that's a typo in the transcript or misstatement in the call itself when you look at it in context of the question and the entire answer.
If it is a misstatement rather then a typo....it essentialy functions as a "get out of jail - free card" though. There are legal consequences for lying to or misleading investors during an earnings statement. There are no consequences for making factual statements that an investor interprets wrongly. You are only accountable for what you actualy say...not what someone THINKS you meant.
That's one of the things one should always keep in mind when reading ANY earnings statement (not just this one from EA/BIOWARE.....and I'm not even assuming this is the case here.) Companies often purposefully attempt to use language that is inprecise, intentionaly vague or confusing in thier statements. That allows them to present things in a manner that an investor MAY be inclined to interpret in the best possible light for the company...... avoid any legal consequences if what the investor believes is factualy inaccurate....because all you are accountable for is what you ACTUALY SAY/WRITE.
It's actualy a common tactic that the people who write those sorts of statements use....and they pretty much all use it, it's not exclusive to anyone. They often even use it when thier products ARE performing well....it's almost like a force of habit that they can't shake.
1.7 million subscribers aren't unbelievable , because i know many that decided to give SWTOR a month to see what are some of the changes that they will be bringing. Althought many of the same players that decided to subscribe a month didn't actually play the whole month and already given up after 1 week . They are still paying for it.
Bioware is getting payed, because its Bioware, but its only gonna carry it so far.
I might subscribe for another month just to see the new 1.2 update, which I hope bring more variety to the PVP and PVE. But I do know that once GW2, Diablo 3 and Mass Effect 3 comes out, they will be the games I focus my time with. SWTOR is no longer the game that I will be willing to spend more of my money on.
So I do expect the numbers to slowly climb that will eventually fall down ( due to new players reaching 50 and not knowing what to do and the lack of republic players on most servers) , but once those other games comes out, it really have to distinguish itself to become more successful. Unless Bioware wants to keep pushing Patches out that destroy their game themselves then it might just die faster.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
1,700,000+ active subscribers – 1 million concurrent
Average session time was four hours during the first month and a half
99.5% Server Uptime
1 million doesn't sound right, especially with 4.5 hours avg session time; avg. session time would have to be 13-14 hours to match concurrent. Not sure what that number is about.
If you read the rest of the article, they state that at this point, most of those 1.7 million subs are "paying subs". That is, they're past their free month and have paid their first sub fee.
Either way, the haters are choking on their sour grapes, right now. The WAR-esque predictions haven't come true, and likely won't. That doesn't guarantee success indefinitely(nothing does), but any talk of "titanic" failure is even more absurd now than it was closer to launch.
Really? War sold 1.2 million copies and had 800.000 subs after the first month so in that regard SW:TOR is so far similar to WAR.
Except for one difference, SWTOR has more subs right now than WAR ever did.
Well naturally, this is Star Wars we are talking about, it is way bigger IP than Warhammer, and it was released during the christmas holidays, which further boost sales. So the numbers are not exactly the same but similar. For sure this is no WoW killer we are talking about because WoW gained subs, month after month, where as SW:TOR is already starting to lose subs.
As Teala said, down around 400k subs from 2.1 million just after a month. I guess the loss will be even greater after the second month when more people have played through the storylines and realised there is not much after.
I don't care about the whole "WoW Killer" thing. Never have. I really don't think most people who are playing do either. Some people will throw that term around, but I don't give a crap about wow.
Second, the only thing this shows is that SWTOR had a VERY successful launch and first month, with pretty decent retention. It doesn't indicate what's going to happen next month. It doesn't mean 400k people are going to quit next month or that the game will grow.
You guys can deny it all you want, but in the first month and a half, this game is very successful from where I'm standing. Their first month retention is very high, by your own admission.
I'm not saying that the game is going to do better or worse next month. All I'm saying is that this first month was very successful.
No doubt, it was extremely successful in it's first month. The trick now is to keep being as successful. I am not seeing it. But hey, maybe Bioware will do something awesome and the game will eventually start growing, as it is now, it isn't growing, it is losing subs at a substantial rate.
And you know this how exactly? Of course it's not the first time you write BS out of thin air in these boards without anything to back up your claims.
1.7 million subs 6 weeks after release.. yeah, it is losing subs at a substantial rate indeed
Come talk to me in 3 months when people are screaming for merger servers - I'll stand by what I have wrote. In 6 to 8 months this game will be merging servers.
Comments
dont forget thos are sales and subs become to drop in hte first month even bioware ananunce than 800k acc was in the total of all servers wish mean they dont even have 1 million pp playing right now and that info was 1 week ago
the game wills tilld rop (im not hater) and when gw 2 came out lot of p2p games will be drop by half as expected,also tor is not worth be p2p tahst the reason icancell mi subs even gw 1 still betetr and i would pay x that game but guess what? is fre and tahst how it suposed to be .
I made several assumptions.
1) EA isn't lying.
2) VGChartz numbers are at least close to reality.
3) Anyone who isn't up to the 1 month point is counted as a player, regardless of whether they're playing or not.
4) Everyone who bought the game actually started playing or registered the game when they bought a box.
I was just showing that a 78% retention rate could yield 1.7 million players, and also that the majority of the players had paid for play time beyond the first month of time included in the game's purchase.
We're all using numbers that are better than using XFire stats, but we're all still guessing. When all you know is 1 number, you can create several scenarios that yield that number. Until EA releases actual retention rates, and then defines what those retention rates mean, we don't know much beyond what they've said on Feb. 1.
Also, I do a lot of boring stuff with spreadsheets at work. This was a chance to do something at least marginally interesting (compared to work).
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The Locust have already begun their departures. The people not so happy with the game will be leaving soon...
My due date is March. I'd love to see the numbers after March.
PM before you report at least or you could just block.
This soon after an MMO launches, active subs aren't a good indicator of anything. I don't know how long the average person holds onto a sub, how many drop before the first month is up, how many pay for one extra month, two, or three.. I think the real indicator isn't subs, but how active the servers are. How many people are actually logging in and playing. People tend to taper off, before they go and cancel. It always takes a few months, but at first, you can see the trend in how actively people are playing, not how actively they're subscribing.
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.
^ it's still amazing how much people think the first few months matter as long as the game plays at launch(IE not completely broken like FFXIV). The majority of people will play for a few months and quit look at rift huge numbers right off the bat then around months 3-6 huge drop offs. Once people get through a few stories and hit 50 I bet you a huge drop off will start. Numbers now are meaningless and honestly look at little low considering how big star wars is and how big of a name bioware is. But in a game centered around a single player story and offering nothing new endgame wise that hasn't been out for the last decade I just don't see how people believe this game isn't going to go into a huge decline in the coming months...
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/339443/Video-FollowUp-Guide-For-Enhancing-Graphics-and-Performance-in-SWTORSorry-still-Nvidia-Only.html
I quit after my one month expired. I left my 44 lvl character because the game was too glitchuy, customer service was non-existent and pretty bad when they did reply, the pvp was repetitive and monotonous (3 unchanging arenas? really?) and the game became too grindy! Also, there is no worthy endgame content
The 1.7 million subscriber number as of February 1st doesn't make sense based on actual populations. I'm still wondering if the CEO was referring to the numbers as of 12/31 and calling them current as in the current report rather than the current day.
The sales figures are great, but the retention numbers seem way too high as of 2/1.
Anyway, I guess the next quarterly report will be less confusing.
Don't worry, the Skyrim Creation Kit, which is launching next Tuesday, will take care of that. As will the growing Diablo 3 beta.
From the statement:
"Star Wars®: The Old Republic™ has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through
more than 2 million units in a little over one month."
There was no confusion there. Even in the statement it was clear they were not talking about Dec 31s which was 11 days from launch, not a little over a month.
You also can't judge based on in game populations, after the initial rush people log in less, this is normal. I doesn't mean they don't maintain a sub or didn't sub for 3, 6 or 12 months.
Let me note that I'm not saying you are wrong, but:
That quote is vague enough to be read multiple ways. They consider active subscribers differently than WOW as they force you to register for a plan in order to play. They also say '1.7 million active subscribers ... in a little over one month" which would also be accurate if they counted all of the subscribers during that time "over one month", rather than the number of subscribers on a certain date "on February 1st".
Blizzard most likely counts subscribers during a quarter as anyone that had an active subscription for as little as one day during that quarter.
They announced on Dec 27th thay they had 1 million accounts created. Do you think they sold 700k copies in the next 4 days?
Well that's that. My friend decided after all this time that he "hates" this game. lol. He's tired of laggy pvp, no endgame content, and not having the ability to choose what gear to spend your "valor" on (not sure what he means since I haven't been to lvl 50 - he "keeps getting the same belt"). He said the story is good but it's not enough to keep a turd afloat. It's about time... the only thing that sucks is he didn't decide this before my free month was up, now I'm going to be counted in that first paid month too. I think.
Welcome to MMos. I am sorry your stay was unpleasent, but I understand that people sometimes do not like the genre. I hope that SWTOR didn't leave a bad taste in your mouth, and I hope you enjoy your continued play on console games.
They are, as that is what they were legaly bound to report on. Not after dec 31st.
The amount of people that actually actively subscribed after January 20th will be in the next report.
Actualy when asked by an investor during the earnings call Gibeau specificaly stated that he "CAN'T" say the majority of those 1.7 million paid thier sub fee rather then being in thier free month. Most people are assuming he mispoke or was misquoted in the transcript because he went on to describe that as positive evidence of the game doing well in his next sentance.... so "CAN'T" really wouldn't make much sense in that context. However I wouldn't be entirely sure about that. You are only legaly responsible for what you actualy say during an earnings call...not how someone might interpret what you said (if the interpretation was contrary to your actual words)... in any event, time will tell with TOR... 4-6 months down the road everyone should have a much clearer picture of it's retention and long term health.
Yes, one would tend to ASSUME that's a typo in the transcript or misstatement in the call itself when you look at it in context of the question and the entire answer.
If it is a misstatement rather then a typo....it essentialy functions as a "get out of jail - free card" though. There are legal consequences for lying to or misleading investors during an earnings statement. There are no consequences for making factual statements that an investor interprets wrongly. You are only accountable for what you actualy say...not what someone THINKS you meant.
That's one of the things one should always keep in mind when reading ANY earnings statement (not just this one from EA/BIOWARE.....and I'm not even assuming this is the case here.) Companies often purposefully attempt to use language that is inprecise, intentionaly vague or confusing in thier statements. That allows them to present things in a manner that an investor MAY be inclined to interpret in the best possible light for the company...... avoid any legal consequences if what the investor believes is factualy inaccurate....because all you are accountable for is what you ACTUALY SAY/WRITE.
It's actualy a common tactic that the people who write those sorts of statements use....and they pretty much all use it, it's not exclusive to anyone. They often even use it when thier products ARE performing well....it's almost like a force of habit that they can't shake.
1.7 million subscribers aren't unbelievable , because i know many that decided to give SWTOR a month to see what are some of the changes that they will be bringing. Althought many of the same players that decided to subscribe a month didn't actually play the whole month and already given up after 1 week . They are still paying for it.
Bioware is getting payed, because its Bioware, but its only gonna carry it so far.
I might subscribe for another month just to see the new 1.2 update, which I hope bring more variety to the PVP and PVE. But I do know that once GW2, Diablo 3 and Mass Effect 3 comes out, they will be the games I focus my time with. SWTOR is no longer the game that I will be willing to spend more of my money on.
So I do expect the numbers to slowly climb that will eventually fall down ( due to new players reaching 50 and not knowing what to do and the lack of republic players on most servers) , but once those other games comes out, it really have to distinguish itself to become more successful. Unless Bioware wants to keep pushing Patches out that destroy their game themselves then it might just die faster.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
Oh hai! I'm ready to talk!
Quite...message was received. Thank you.
Nice.
“To crush your enemies -- See them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women!”
Even half a year later... FORUM WAR!!!!
LOL!
Please stop necroing threads.