I dont think anybody needs to measure SWtor from a games magazine, I pretty sure we all made our own conclusions after we were all sucked into the hype. I dont ever take a review by anybody seriously, I can review the game myself and make my own decisions on whether I want to continue playing it. Personally I think 7/10 is very generous, I wouldnt give it more than 5/10, but that isnt relevant because each individual has there own opinion.
considering they had a 80%+ retention rate after the 2nd month.
It has not had a 85% retention rate, the last quarterly report just shows how many bought the game and then activated it, it show no retention what so ever. That 15% is just the copies that never went active. I bought 3. one I activated and 2 did not activate. The figure was based off subscriptions at end of Dec 31st 2011. Virtually everyone was subscribed at that date on the first 30 days, except those who may have contacted support to cancel the subscription as could not do it manually. I did not bother as support took ages, and was easier to just cancel it 3+ weeks later, when they let you cancel it.
games tm magazine (UK magazine) scores it 7/10 "A great narrative can't escape the traps of the genre"
"Better than STO" "Worse than EVE Online"
I do not agree with this as STO and EVE have better space, but ground is non existent in EVE, until Dust 514 is released
Closing paragraph (copied from mag so if there are typos then it is down to me and not the mag):
"There's little doubt that The Old Republic could have been a groundbreaking release, but it instead chooses to hew closeley to the MMO formula, relying too much on the grind and outdated mechanics that don't gel with the Star Wars Licence. Only time will tell if further expansion can lead to a more organic universe worthy of its monthly subscription fee"
To read it all - go to your local newsagents and buy (or just read) it, or search interent and see if someone has scanned it, as I am not typing up the entire review!
Funny how they claim it was not ground breaking, when it was never supposed to be. It has still been the biggest launch in MMO history and no one can dispute that. There has also been no indication the population is dropping, considering they had a 80%+ retention rate after the 2nd month. I also find it hilarious that the reviewer indicates it relies too much on outdated mechanics when those are the mechanics that make the most money and have been the most successful since MMOs started. Saying the game is worse than Eve online is obviously biased towards wanting a full blown space -travel for 45 minutes,afk while you mine, watch tv on other monitor while fighting- fest. You can't even compare Eve and SWTOR, they are not even close to the same. That would be like comparing Call of Duty to Skyrim. It makes no sense, and completely eliminates most,if not all, of the credibility the author had. (Which judging by the site, is probably none anyways)
Saying that the mechanics don't gel with the SW Licence is just ignorance on the authors part. Bioware already made a game with VERY simular gameplay in KOTOR. The "grind" in this game is also the smallest grind in a themepark to date, so that is hardly a good argument. You want to read a review that is honest about the game and not biased? Go to IGN.
Can you repost with some facts please?
"80% retention lol". Where did you pull that figure from?
"No indication the population is dropping". Every metric you can find, charts, server stats, friends list, guild members... suggests otherwise.
Unfortunately there are no hard stats because BW/EA aren't releasing them. No surprise there.
Tell me though, where is the good news from BW/EA?
I've seen nothing!
80% retention or even close would have been something in the news. It's never happened before, ever.
OMG they creep out of the woodwork don't they?
You want facts? How about the investor call where EA said they had 1.7 million subs? Funny how you say that, yet you follow up with an unbacked "fact" of yours claiming there are metrics that prove otherwise.
I said metrics that "suggest" otherwise. No facts because BW/EA are doing everything to avoid them.
I don't disagree they had 1.7 million "accounts". If Star Wars can't create that amount of interest, nothing can. Subs is another story.
Did you ever wonder why you had to give your credit card info before you played on release date, even with a "free month". Maybe so they could count them as subs when in-fact a boat load of people cancelled before the month was out?
Yawn.
All mmos require your credit card to setup a subscription. Thats just how they work. Free trials don't work that way, but launch MMOs do and have.The "FACT" is that they said they had 1.7 million active subs, which yes, includes the free month. They also said "most" of those people were paying, and the date they were judging this on was after the free month was up for the initial purchase, which is where a major portion of the purchases were for the game.
The only part of your argument is that they are sugar coating the actual numbers, which is not a fact and is actually an opinion. So no, again, you have nothing backing your argument. I never said they are not losing population, but I said there is nothing to indicate that they are losing subs. The only numbers we have are from EA/Bioware right now, and those numbers indicate success.
@Bunks: I'm having fun with the game there are no necessity that you feel sorry for me thank you for the tough.
I feel sorry for must be hard for an adult have an inflated sense of self-importance.
That's quite alright, glad you enjoy the game. but the dozens of my friends who screamed, spewed, cajoled, and other not so nice things, was who I was mainly talking about. Even my own son wanted revenge for being scamed by this POS game. But glad you like it. So not all is lost on it.
Me personally, I would love EA to lose a ton of money, but right now, they are so I am pretty happy. But only becasue I want my hobby to get better from the disease we know as the WOW Copy Syndrome.
Nice to see people admiting to having a clear agenda when positng here.
games tm magazine (UK magazine) scores it 7/10 "A great narrative can't escape the traps of the genre"
"Better than STO" "Worse than EVE Online"
I do not agree with this as STO and EVE have better space, but ground is non existent in EVE, until Dust 514 is released
Closing paragraph (copied from mag so if there are typos then it is down to me and not the mag):
"There's little doubt that The Old Republic could have been a groundbreaking release, but it instead chooses to hew closeley to the MMO formula, relying too much on the grind and outdated mechanics that don't gel with the Star Wars Licence. Only time will tell if further expansion can lead to a more organic universe worthy of its monthly subscription fee"
To read it all - go to your local newsagents and buy (or just read) it, or search interent and see if someone has scanned it, as I am not typing up the entire review!
Funny how they claim it was not ground breaking, when it was never supposed to be. It has still been the biggest launch in MMO history and no one can dispute that. There has also been no indication the population is dropping, considering they had a 80%+ retention rate after the 2nd month. I also find it hilarious that the reviewer indicates it relies too much on outdated mechanics when those are the mechanics that make the most money and have been the most successful since MMOs started. Saying the game is worse than Eve online is obviously biased towards wanting a full blown space -travel for 45 minutes,afk while you mine, watch tv on other monitor while fighting- fest. You can't even compare Eve and SWTOR, they are not even close to the same. That would be like comparing Call of Duty to Skyrim. It makes no sense, and completely eliminates most,if not all, of the credibility the author had. (Which judging by the site, is probably none anyways)
Saying that the mechanics don't gel with the SW Licence is just ignorance on the authors part. Bioware already made a game with VERY simular gameplay in KOTOR. The "grind" in this game is also the smallest grind in a themepark to date, so that is hardly a good argument. You want to read a review that is honest about the game and not biased? Go to IGN.
Can you repost with some facts please?
"80% retention lol". Where did you pull that figure from?
"No indication the population is dropping". Every metric you can find, charts, server stats, friends list, guild members... suggests otherwise.
Unfortunately there are no hard stats because BW/EA aren't releasing them. No surprise there.
Tell me though, where is the good news from BW/EA?
I've seen nothing!
80% retention or even close would have been something in the news. It's never happened before, ever.
OMG they creep out of the woodwork don't they?
You want facts? How about the investor call where EA said they had 1.7 million subs? Funny how you say that, yet you follow up with an unbacked "fact" of yours claiming there are metrics that prove otherwise.
I said metrics that "suggest" otherwise. No facts because BW/EA are doing everything to avoid them.
I don't disagree they had 1.7 million "accounts". If Star Wars can't create that amount of interest, nothing can. Subs is another story.
Did you ever wonder why you had to give your credit card info before you played on release date, even with a "free month". Maybe so they could count them as subs when in-fact a boat load of people cancelled before the month was out?
Yawn.
All mmos require your credit card to setup a subscription. Thats just how they work. Free trials don't work that way, but launch MMOs do and have.The "FACT" is that they said they had 1.7 million active subs, which yes, includes the free month. They also said "most" of those people were paying, and the date they were judging this on was after the free month was up for the initial purchase, which is where a major portion of the purchases were for the game.
The only part of your argument is that they are sugar coating the actual numbers, which is not a fact and is actually an opinion. So no, again, you have nothing backing your argument. I never said they are not losing population, but I said there is nothing to indicate that they are losing subs. The only numbers we have are from EA/Bioware right now, and those numbers indicate success.
The quarterly report was posted after the 30 days but the data was up to Dec 31st 2011, if you read what it said
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011. "
Why does it matter what any reviewer rates a game? They can't tell you if you will like a game or not, unless you are one of those sheep who let everyone else think for you. At best, a review can describe features and flaws of the game and you can make a better decision before you buy.
The releasing of the report was followed by a conference all with investors where it was made clear subscription numbers given were current as of Feb 1st.
games tm magazine (UK magazine) scores it 7/10 "A great narrative can't escape the traps of the genre"
"Better than STO" "Worse than EVE Online"
I do not agree with this as STO and EVE have better space, but ground is non existent in EVE, until Dust 514 is released
Closing paragraph (copied from mag so if there are typos then it is down to me and not the mag):
"There's little doubt that The Old Republic could have been a groundbreaking release, but it instead chooses to hew closeley to the MMO formula, relying too much on the grind and outdated mechanics that don't gel with the Star Wars Licence. Only time will tell if further expansion can lead to a more organic universe worthy of its monthly subscription fee"
To read it all - go to your local newsagents and buy (or just read) it, or search interent and see if someone has scanned it, as I am not typing up the entire review!
Funny how they claim it was not ground breaking, when it was never supposed to be. It has still been the biggest launch in MMO history and no one can dispute that. There has also been no indication the population is dropping, considering they had a 80%+ retention rate after the 2nd month. I also find it hilarious that the reviewer indicates it relies too much on outdated mechanics when those are the mechanics that make the most money and have been the most successful since MMOs started. Saying the game is worse than Eve online is obviously biased towards wanting a full blown space -travel for 45 minutes,afk while you mine, watch tv on other monitor while fighting- fest. You can't even compare Eve and SWTOR, they are not even close to the same. That would be like comparing Call of Duty to Skyrim. It makes no sense, and completely eliminates most,if not all, of the credibility the author had. (Which judging by the site, is probably none anyways)
Saying that the mechanics don't gel with the SW Licence is just ignorance on the authors part. Bioware already made a game with VERY simular gameplay in KOTOR. The "grind" in this game is also the smallest grind in a themepark to date, so that is hardly a good argument. You want to read a review that is honest about the game and not biased? Go to IGN.
Can you repost with some facts please?
"80% retention lol". Where did you pull that figure from?
"No indication the population is dropping". Every metric you can find, charts, server stats, friends list, guild members... suggests otherwise.
Unfortunately there are no hard stats because BW/EA aren't releasing them. No surprise there.
Tell me though, where is the good news from BW/EA?
I've seen nothing!
80% retention or even close would have been something in the news. It's never happened before, ever.
OMG they creep out of the woodwork don't they?
You want facts? How about the investor call where EA said they had 1.7 million subs? Funny how you say that, yet you follow up with an unbacked "fact" of yours claiming there are metrics that prove otherwise.
I said metrics that "suggest" otherwise. No facts because BW/EA are doing everything to avoid them.
I don't disagree they had 1.7 million "accounts". If Star Wars can't create that amount of interest, nothing can. Subs is another story.
Did you ever wonder why you had to give your credit card info before you played on release date, even with a "free month". Maybe so they could count them as subs when in-fact a boat load of people cancelled before the month was out?
Yawn.
All mmos require your credit card to setup a subscription. Thats just how they work. Free trials don't work that way, but launch MMOs do and have.The "FACT" is that they said they had 1.7 million active subs, which yes, includes the free month. They also said "most" of those people were paying, and the date they were judging this on was after the free month was up for the initial purchase, which is where a major portion of the purchases were for the game.
The only part of your argument is that they are sugar coating the actual numbers, which is not a fact and is actually an opinion. So no, again, you have nothing backing your argument. I never said they are not losing population, but I said there is nothing to indicate that they are losing subs. The only numbers we have are from EA/Bioware right now, and those numbers indicate success.
There's a difference between buying the game and subscribing.
Regarding the second paragraph, I have everything "backing my argument" other than actual facts.
If you can come up with reasons you think populations aren't declining, other than your saying so, fire away. I'm all ears.
So answer one of my original questions to you. Apart from the fact that initial interest was huge (1.7 million), where is the good news from BW/EA since then? Anything at all.
The releasing of the report was followed by a conference all with investors where it was made clear subscription numbers given were current as of Feb 1st.
Probably just means current as of Feb 1st from the querterly report ending Dec 31st 2011. They have no data from Jan 1st.
When you take into account copies bought but not yet used, that is virtually 100% retention rate, but official server stats and Xfire and loads of complaints say otherwise, unless people are still subbing, but not playing. I would belive they still had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st, if they sold 3 million, but 15% loss does not compute
games tm magazine (UK magazine) scores it 7/10 "A great narrative can't escape the traps of the genre"
"Better than STO" "Worse than EVE Online"
I do not agree with this as STO and EVE have better space, but ground is non existent in EVE, until Dust 514 is released
Closing paragraph (copied from mag so if there are typos then it is down to me and not the mag):
"There's little doubt that The Old Republic could have been a groundbreaking release, but it instead chooses to hew closeley to the MMO formula, relying too much on the grind and outdated mechanics that don't gel with the Star Wars Licence. Only time will tell if further expansion can lead to a more organic universe worthy of its monthly subscription fee"
To read it all - go to your local newsagents and buy (or just read) it, or search interent and see if someone has scanned it, as I am not typing up the entire review!
Funny how they claim it was not ground breaking, when it was never supposed to be. It has still been the biggest launch in MMO history and no one can dispute that. There has also been no indication the population is dropping, considering they had a 80%+ retention rate after the 2nd month. I also find it hilarious that the reviewer indicates it relies too much on outdated mechanics when those are the mechanics that make the most money and have been the most successful since MMOs started. Saying the game is worse than Eve online is obviously biased towards wanting a full blown space -travel for 45 minutes,afk while you mine, watch tv on other monitor while fighting- fest. You can't even compare Eve and SWTOR, they are not even close to the same. That would be like comparing Call of Duty to Skyrim. It makes no sense, and completely eliminates most,if not all, of the credibility the author had. (Which judging by the site, is probably none anyways)
Saying that the mechanics don't gel with the SW Licence is just ignorance on the authors part. Bioware already made a game with VERY simular gameplay in KOTOR. The "grind" in this game is also the smallest grind in a themepark to date, so that is hardly a good argument. You want to read a review that is honest about the game and not biased? Go to IGN.
Can you repost with some facts please?
"80% retention lol". Where did you pull that figure from?
"No indication the population is dropping". Every metric you can find, charts, server stats, friends list, guild members... suggests otherwise.
Unfortunately there are no hard stats because BW/EA aren't releasing them. No surprise there.
Tell me though, where is the good news from BW/EA?
I've seen nothing!
80% retention or even close would have been something in the news. It's never happened before, ever.
OMG they creep out of the woodwork don't they?
You want facts? How about the investor call where EA said they had 1.7 million subs? Funny how you say that, yet you follow up with an unbacked "fact" of yours claiming there are metrics that prove otherwise.
I said metrics that "suggest" otherwise. No facts because BW/EA are doing everything to avoid them.
I don't disagree they had 1.7 million "accounts". If Star Wars can't create that amount of interest, nothing can. Subs is another story.
Did you ever wonder why you had to give your credit card info before you played on release date, even with a "free month". Maybe so they could count them as subs when in-fact a boat load of people cancelled before the month was out?
Yawn.
All mmos require your credit card to setup a subscription. Thats just how they work. Free trials don't work that way, but launch MMOs do and have.The "FACT" is that they said they had 1.7 million active subs, which yes, includes the free month. They also said "most" of those people were paying, and the date they were judging this on was after the free month was up for the initial purchase, which is where a major portion of the purchases were for the game.
The only part of your argument is that they are sugar coating the actual numbers, which is not a fact and is actually an opinion. So no, again, you have nothing backing your argument. I never said they are not losing population, but I said there is nothing to indicate that they are losing subs. The only numbers we have are from EA/Bioware right now, and those numbers indicate success.
There's a difference between buying the game and subscribing.
Regarding the second paragraph, I have everything "backing my argument" other than actual facts.
If you can come up with reasons you think populations aren't declining, other than your saying so, fire away. I'm all ears.
So answer one of my original questions to you. Apart from the fact that initial interest was huge (1.7 million), where is the good news from BW/EA since then? Anything at all.
Once again, you have nothing. You continue to act as if you are right based on no facts, claiming I don't have facts, then throwing my facts back at me as if I am somehow wrong. Infact, as stated above, the subs were current as of feb 1st. Once again, 1.7million only 2 weeks ago and nothing else even remotely related to facts has been stated otherwise. This is infact, the only fact I need to prove my argument that there is infact no indication to show that they are losing subscribers.
The releasing of the report was followed by a conference all with investors where it was made clear subscription numbers given were current as of Feb 1st.
Probably just means current as of Feb 1st from the querterly report ending Dec 31st 2011. They have no data from Jan 1st.
When you take into account copies bought but not yet used, that is virtually 100% retention rate, but official server stats and Xfire and loads of complaints say otherwise, unless people are still subbing, but not playing. I would belive they still had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st, if they sold 3 million, but 15% loss does not compute
Finally you have something remotely recognizable as an argument! Too bad the server population capacity of the servers has been raised since launch. Xfire is not exactly data that means anything at all. People kept spouting that Rift was a failure due to Xfire stats, yet it is one of (if not the most) the successful games since WoW launched.
I like how you are twisting words they say around to benefit your argument. Let me put it to you straight: As of Feb 1st, 2012, there were 1.7 million people playing SWTOR. There is no other way to spin that.
The releasing of the report was followed by a conference all with investors where it was made clear subscription numbers given were current as of Feb 1st.
Probably just means current as of Feb 1st from the querterly report ending Dec 31st 2011. They have no data from Jan 1st.
When you take into account copies bought but not yet used, that is virtually 100% retention rate, but official server stats and Xfire and loads of complaints say otherwise, unless people are still subbing, but not playing. I would belive they still had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st, if they sold 3 million, but 15% loss does not compute
Finally you have something remotely recognizable as an argument! Too bad the server population capacity of the servers has been raised since launch. Xfire is not exactly data that means anything at all. People kept spouting that Rift was a failure due to Xfire stats, yet it is one of (if not the most) the successful games since WoW launched.
I like how you are twisting words they say around to benefit your argument. Let me put it to you straight: As of Feb 1st, 2012, there were 1.7 million people playing SWTOR. There is no other way to spin that.
Except it does not state that they had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st. It is stated in the financial report and THEY state
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Its amazing people can say such ridiculous things with straight face. i am no SWTOR fanboy but even i know that it is not going to be a failure... not even close.
For someone who likes to talk about facts you surely got none.
The releasing of the report was followed by a conference all with investors where it was made clear subscription numbers given were current as of Feb 1st.
Probably just means current as of Feb 1st from the querterly report ending Dec 31st 2011. They have no data from Jan 1st.
When you take into account copies bought but not yet used, that is virtually 100% retention rate, but official server stats and Xfire and loads of complaints say otherwise, unless people are still subbing, but not playing. I would belive they still had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st, if they sold 3 million, but 15% loss does not compute
Finally you have something remotely recognizable as an argument! Too bad the server population capacity of the servers has been raised since launch. Xfire is not exactly data that means anything at all. People kept spouting that Rift was a failure due to Xfire stats, yet it is one of (if not the most) the successful games since WoW launched.
I like how you are twisting words they say around to benefit your argument. Let me put it to you straight: As of Feb 1st, 2012, there were 1.7 million people playing SWTOR. There is no other way to spin that.
Except it does not state that they had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st. It is stated in the financial report and THEY state
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
Dec 31st is what is stated by EA, nothing in there about Feb 1st at all
Actually, considering the date said Feb 1st...and no where did they claim the subscriber numbers were current as of December 31st.
What this means, for you who apparently does not understand the legal jargen surrounding a share holder meeting, is that they have generated 1.7 million subs. They sold more then 2 million as of December 31st. They won't just lie to share holders, that would not be a wise idea.
-- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through more than 2 million units in a little over one month.
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Its amazing people can say such ridiculous things with straight face. i am not SWTOR fanboy but even i know that it is not going to be a failure... not even close.
For someone who likes to talk about facts you surely got none.
From a post I made at an earlier time. I was corrected when I thought that what they said still held true.
They need 500k subs to break even. Close to a million to be profitable. Anything less and it's an epic fail, or is that wrong?
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Its amazing people can say such ridiculous things with straight face. i am not SWTOR fanboy but even i know that it is not going to be a failure... not even close.
For someone who likes to talk about facts you surely got none.
From a post I made at an earlier time. I was corrected when I thought that what they said still held true.
They need 500k subs to break even. Close to a million to be profitable. Anything less and it's an epic fail, or is that wrong?
*shrugs*
Care to show me a link where they say it needs close to a million sub to be profitable? and even if it is true isn't it a bit premature to jump on' SWTOR is a failure' band wagon? i am pretty sure that they re couped a large part of their investmennt from box sales alone by this time.
games tm magazine (UK magazine) scores it 7/10 "A great narrative can't escape the traps of the genre"
"Better than STO" "Worse than EVE Online"
I do not agree with this as STO and EVE have better space, but ground is non existent in EVE, until Dust 514 is released
Closing paragraph (copied from mag so if there are typos then it is down to me and not the mag):
"There's little doubt that The Old Republic could have been a groundbreaking release, but it instead chooses to hew closeley to the MMO formula, relying too much on the grind and outdated mechanics that don't gel with the Star Wars Licence. Only time will tell if further expansion can lead to a more organic universe worthy of its monthly subscription fee"
To read it all - go to your local newsagents and buy (or just read) it, or search interent and see if someone has scanned it, as I am not typing up the entire review!
Funny how they claim it was not ground breaking, when it was never supposed to be. It has still been the biggest launch in MMO history and no one can dispute that. There has also been no indication the population is dropping, considering they had a 80%+ retention rate after the 2nd month. I also find it hilarious that the reviewer indicates it relies too much on outdated mechanics when those are the mechanics that make the most money and have been the most successful since MMOs started. Saying the game is worse than Eve online is obviously biased towards wanting a full blown space -travel for 45 minutes,afk while you mine, watch tv on other monitor while fighting- fest. You can't even compare Eve and SWTOR, they are not even close to the same. That would be like comparing Call of Duty to Skyrim. It makes no sense, and completely eliminates most,if not all, of the credibility the author had. (Which judging by the site, is probably none anyways)
Saying that the mechanics don't gel with the SW Licence is just ignorance on the authors part. Bioware already made a game with VERY simular gameplay in KOTOR. The "grind" in this game is also the smallest grind in a themepark to date, so that is hardly a good argument. You want to read a review that is honest about the game and not biased? Go to IGN.
Can you repost with some facts please?
"80% retention lol". Where did you pull that figure from?
"No indication the population is dropping". Every metric you can find, charts, server stats, friends list, guild members... suggests otherwise.
Unfortunately there are no hard stats because BW/EA aren't releasing them. No surprise there.
Tell me though, where is the good news from BW/EA?
I've seen nothing!
80% retention or even close would have been something in the news. It's never happened before, ever.
OMG they creep out of the woodwork don't they?
You want facts? How about the investor call where EA said they had 1.7 million subs? Funny how you say that, yet you follow up with an unbacked "fact" of yours claiming there are metrics that prove otherwise.
I said metrics that "suggest" otherwise. No facts because BW/EA are doing everything to avoid them.
I don't disagree they had 1.7 million "accounts". If Star Wars can't create that amount of interest, nothing can. Subs is another story.
Did you ever wonder why you had to give your credit card info before you played on release date, even with a "free month". Maybe so they could count them as subs when in-fact a boat load of people cancelled before the month was out?
Yawn.
All mmos require your credit card to setup a subscription. Thats just how they work. Free trials don't work that way, but launch MMOs do and have.The "FACT" is that they said they had 1.7 million active subs, which yes, includes the free month. They also said "most" of those people were paying, and the date they were judging this on was after the free month was up for the initial purchase, which is where a major portion of the purchases were for the game.
The only part of your argument is that they are sugar coating the actual numbers, which is not a fact and is actually an opinion. So no, again, you have nothing backing your argument. I never said they are not losing population, but I said there is nothing to indicate that they are losing subs. The only numbers we have are from EA/Bioware right now, and those numbers indicate success.
There's a difference between buying the game and subscribing.
Regarding the second paragraph, I have everything "backing my argument" other than actual facts.
If you can come up with reasons you think populations aren't declining, other than your saying so, fire away. I'm all ears.
So answer one of my original questions to you. Apart from the fact that initial interest was huge (1.7 million), where is the good news from BW/EA since then? Anything at all.
Once again, you have nothing. You continue to act as if you are right based on no facts, claiming I don't have facts, then throwing my facts back at me as if I am somehow wrong. Infact, as stated above, the subs were current as of feb 1st. Once again, 1.7million only 2 weeks ago and nothing else even remotely related to facts has been stated otherwise. This is infact, the only fact I need to prove my argument that there is infact no indication to show that they are losing subscribers.
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Actually, the server populations were raised after the headstart to lower que times. With higher population caps comes lower population indicators on the server status page, which does not prove anything one way or another. Since a population of "standard" from before could be light now,ect.
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Its amazing people can say such ridiculous things with straight face. i am not SWTOR fanboy but even i know that it is not going to be a failure... not even close.
For someone who likes to talk about facts you surely got none.
Care to join in then?
Prove to us that SWTOR is not losing subs hand over fist.
Difficult to prove isn't it when the only thing you have to hang on to are the initial sales figures?
Go online and screenshot the number of people in fleet. Lets face it, that's the only place anybody is right now.
Show me some other charts or stats that shows SWTOR is doing well.
Point me to the news articles that BW/EA are pushing out to show how successful the game is at this time.
games tm magazine (UK magazine) scores it 7/10 "A great narrative can't escape the traps of the genre"
"Better than STO" "Worse than EVE Online"
I do not agree with this as STO and EVE have better space, but ground is non existent in EVE, until Dust 514 is released
Closing paragraph (copied from mag so if there are typos then it is down to me and not the mag):
"There's little doubt that The Old Republic could have been a groundbreaking release, but it instead chooses to hew closeley to the MMO formula, relying too much on the grind and outdated mechanics that don't gel with the Star Wars Licence. Only time will tell if further expansion can lead to a more organic universe worthy of its monthly subscription fee"
To read it all - go to your local newsagents and buy (or just read) it, or search interent and see if someone has scanned it, as I am not typing up the entire review!
Funny how they claim it was not ground breaking, when it was never supposed to be. It has still been the biggest launch in MMO history and no one can dispute that. There has also been no indication the population is dropping, considering they had a 80%+ retention rate after the 2nd month. I also find it hilarious that the reviewer indicates it relies too much on outdated mechanics when those are the mechanics that make the most money and have been the most successful since MMOs started. Saying the game is worse than Eve online is obviously biased towards wanting a full blown space -travel for 45 minutes,afk while you mine, watch tv on other monitor while fighting- fest. You can't even compare Eve and SWTOR, they are not even close to the same. That would be like comparing Call of Duty to Skyrim. It makes no sense, and completely eliminates most,if not all, of the credibility the author had. (Which judging by the site, is probably none anyways)
Saying that the mechanics don't gel with the SW Licence is just ignorance on the authors part. Bioware already made a game with VERY simular gameplay in KOTOR. The "grind" in this game is also the smallest grind in a themepark to date, so that is hardly a good argument. You want to read a review that is honest about the game and not biased? Go to IGN.
Can you repost with some facts please?
"80% retention lol". Where did you pull that figure from?
"No indication the population is dropping". Every metric you can find, charts, server stats, friends list, guild members... suggests otherwise.
Unfortunately there are no hard stats because BW/EA aren't releasing them. No surprise there.
Tell me though, where is the good news from BW/EA?
I've seen nothing!
80% retention or even close would have been something in the news. It's never happened before, ever.
OMG they creep out of the woodwork don't they?
You want facts? How about the investor call where EA said they had 1.7 million subs? Funny how you say that, yet you follow up with an unbacked "fact" of yours claiming there are metrics that prove otherwise.
I said metrics that "suggest" otherwise. No facts because BW/EA are doing everything to avoid them.
I don't disagree they had 1.7 million "accounts". If Star Wars can't create that amount of interest, nothing can. Subs is another story.
Did you ever wonder why you had to give your credit card info before you played on release date, even with a "free month". Maybe so they could count them as subs when in-fact a boat load of people cancelled before the month was out?
Yawn.
All mmos require your credit card to setup a subscription. Thats just how they work. Free trials don't work that way, but launch MMOs do and have.The "FACT" is that they said they had 1.7 million active subs, which yes, includes the free month. They also said "most" of those people were paying, and the date they were judging this on was after the free month was up for the initial purchase, which is where a major portion of the purchases were for the game.
The only part of your argument is that they are sugar coating the actual numbers, which is not a fact and is actually an opinion. So no, again, you have nothing backing your argument. I never said they are not losing population, but I said there is nothing to indicate that they are losing subs. The only numbers we have are from EA/Bioware right now, and those numbers indicate success.
There's a difference between buying the game and subscribing.
Regarding the second paragraph, I have everything "backing my argument" other than actual facts.
If you can come up with reasons you think populations aren't declining, other than your saying so, fire away. I'm all ears.
So answer one of my original questions to you. Apart from the fact that initial interest was huge (1.7 million), where is the good news from BW/EA since then? Anything at all.
Once again, you have nothing. You continue to act as if you are right based on no facts, claiming I don't have facts, then throwing my facts back at me as if I am somehow wrong. Infact, as stated above, the subs were current as of feb 1st. Once again, 1.7million only 2 weeks ago and nothing else even remotely related to facts has been stated otherwise. This is infact, the only fact I need to prove my argument that there is infact no indication to show that they are losing subscribers.
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Actually, the server populations were raised after the headstart to lower que times. With higher population caps comes lower population indicators on the server status page, which does not prove anything one way or another. Since a population of "standard" from before could be light now,ect.
Yup, we've heard all that before, along with charts are worth nothing, or anything else other than official responses from an obviously biased source.
OK, I give up, your chance to prove the game is doing well dude. I wish you luck.
The releasing of the report was followed by a conference all with investors where it was made clear subscription numbers given were current as of Feb 1st.
Probably just means current as of Feb 1st from the querterly report ending Dec 31st 2011. They have no data from Jan 1st.
When you take into account copies bought but not yet used, that is virtually 100% retention rate, but official server stats and Xfire and loads of complaints say otherwise, unless people are still subbing, but not playing. I would belive they still had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st, if they sold 3 million, but 15% loss does not compute
Finally you have something remotely recognizable as an argument! Too bad the server population capacity of the servers has been raised since launch. Xfire is not exactly data that means anything at all. People kept spouting that Rift was a failure due to Xfire stats, yet it is one of (if not the most) the successful games since WoW launched.
I like how you are twisting words they say around to benefit your argument. Let me put it to you straight: As of Feb 1st, 2012, there were 1.7 million people playing SWTOR. There is no other way to spin that.
Except it does not state that they had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st. It is stated in the financial report and THEY state
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
Dec 31st is what is stated by EA, nothing in there about Feb 1st at all
Actually, considering the date said Feb 1st...and no where did they claim the subscriber numbers were current as of December 31st.
What this means, for you who apparently does not understand the legal jargen surrounding a share holder meeting, is that they have generated 1.7 million subs. They sold more then 2 million as of December 31st. They won't just lie to share holders, that would not be a wise idea.
-- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through more than 2 million units in a little over one month.
That last bit more like reads
- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has
1) generated 1.7 million active subscribers
and
2) sold through more than 2 million units in a little over one month.
and not
- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through more than 2 million units, in a little over one month.
It is possible to have sold more than 2 million units in a little over one month as of Dec 31st due to preorders of people buying in Nov and Dec. It is not possible to have generated over 1.7 million active subscribers in over a month, as of Dec 31st Dec 2011
The report was posted on Feb 1st, they would have not compiled and checked the results that fast, for public viewing. They would not want to lie to their share holders, inadvertantly by a mistake.
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Its amazing people can say such ridiculous things with straight face. i am not SWTOR fanboy but even i know that it is not going to be a failure... not even close.
For someone who likes to talk about facts you surely got none.
Care to join in then?
Prove to us that SWTOR is not losing subs hand over fist.
Difficult to prove isn't it when the only thing you have to hang on to are the initial sales figures?
Go online and screenshot the number of people in fleet. Lets face it, that's the only place anybody is right now.
Show me some other charts or stats that shows SWTOR is doing well.
Point me to the news articles that BW/EA are pushing out to show how successful the game is at this time.
I'll answer now because there's no way of getting through to fanbois.
As I thought.... absolutely nothing!
If you are going to try to argue that it is failing, back it up. You have not yet as I have debunked every single pathetic attempt at an argument you created. I understand your rampant,jaded MMO-vet,agenda ridden,hatred of the game...but get real here. Nothing has indicated the game is going downhill, only the contrary.
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Its amazing people can say such ridiculous things with straight face. i am not SWTOR fanboy but even i know that it is not going to be a failure... not even close.
For someone who likes to talk about facts you surely got none.
Care to join in then?
Prove to us that SWTOR is not losing subs hand over fist.
Difficult to prove isn't it when the only thing you have to hang on to are the initial sales figures?
Go online and screenshot the number of people in fleet. Lets face it, that's the only place anybody is right now.
Show me some other charts or stats that shows SWTOR is doing well.
Point me to the news articles that BW/EA are pushing out to show how successful the game is at this time.
Easy there bud you seem too sure about yourself. [Mod Edit]
It works both ways. if you want others to give facts you should back up your statements with facts too. So what facts you can provide to back up your claim that swtor is going to be the biggest failure?
The releasing of the report was followed by a conference all with investors where it was made clear subscription numbers given were current as of Feb 1st.
Probably just means current as of Feb 1st from the querterly report ending Dec 31st 2011. They have no data from Jan 1st.
When you take into account copies bought but not yet used, that is virtually 100% retention rate, but official server stats and Xfire and loads of complaints say otherwise, unless people are still subbing, but not playing. I would belive they still had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st, if they sold 3 million, but 15% loss does not compute
Finally you have something remotely recognizable as an argument! Too bad the server population capacity of the servers has been raised since launch. Xfire is not exactly data that means anything at all. People kept spouting that Rift was a failure due to Xfire stats, yet it is one of (if not the most) the successful games since WoW launched.
I like how you are twisting words they say around to benefit your argument. Let me put it to you straight: As of Feb 1st, 2012, there were 1.7 million people playing SWTOR. There is no other way to spin that.
Except it does not state that they had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st. It is stated in the financial report and THEY state
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
Dec 31st is what is stated by EA, nothing in there about Feb 1st at all
Actually, considering the date said Feb 1st...and no where did they claim the subscriber numbers were current as of December 31st.
What this means, for you who apparently does not understand the legal jargen surrounding a share holder meeting, is that they have generated 1.7 million subs. They sold more then 2 million as of December 31st. They won't just lie to share holders, that would not be a wise idea.
-- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through more than 2 million units in a little over one month.
That last bit more like reads
- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has
1) generated 1.7 million active subscribers
and
2) sold through more than 2 million units in a little over one month.
and not
- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through more than 2 million units, in a little over one month.
It is possible to have sold more than 2 million units in a little over one month as of Dec 31st due to preorders of people buying in Nov and Dec. It is not possible to have generated over 1.7 million active subscribers in over a month, as of Dec 31st Dec 2011
The report was posted on Feb 1st, they would have not compiled and checked the results that fast, for public viewing. They would not want to lie to their share holders, inadvertantly by a mistake.
Considering "most of the people" playing the game, of that 1.7 million people, were paying at that point. You can't say the data was not as of Feb 1st for the sub numbers since it was free up until that point The game would not be launching in another territory if it was not a success.
Despite answering and debating many subjects to you, the only thing you can come up with is 1.7 million.
That will be the only thing SWTOR is ever remembered for. The biggest failure in MMO history.
Its amazing people can say such ridiculous things with straight face. i am not SWTOR fanboy but even i know that it is not going to be a failure... not even close.
For someone who likes to talk about facts you surely got none.
Care to join in then?
Prove to us that SWTOR is not losing subs hand over fist.
Difficult to prove isn't it when the only thing you have to hang on to are the initial sales figures?
Go online and screenshot the number of people in fleet. Lets face it, that's the only place anybody is right now.
Show me some other charts or stats that shows SWTOR is doing well.
Point me to the news articles that BW/EA are pushing out to show how successful the game is at this time.
I'll answer now because there's no way of getting through to fanbois.
As I thought.... absolutely nothing!
If you are going to try to argue that it is failing, back it up. You have not yet as I have debunked every single pathetic attempt at an argument you created. I understand your rampant,jaded MMO-vet,agenda ridden,hatred of the game...but get real here. Nothing has indicated the game is going downhill, only the contrary.
Comments
I dont think anybody needs to measure SWtor from a games magazine, I pretty sure we all made our own conclusions after we were all sucked into the hype. I dont ever take a review by anybody seriously, I can review the game myself and make my own decisions on whether I want to continue playing it. Personally I think 7/10 is very generous, I wouldnt give it more than 5/10, but that isnt relevant because each individual has there own opinion.
It has not had a 85% retention rate, the last quarterly report just shows how many bought the game and then activated it, it show no retention what so ever. That 15% is just the copies that never went active. I bought 3. one I activated and 2 did not activate. The figure was based off subscriptions at end of Dec 31st 2011. Virtually everyone was subscribed at that date on the first 30 days, except those who may have contacted support to cancel the subscription as could not do it manually. I did not bother as support took ages, and was easier to just cancel it 3+ weeks later, when they let you cancel it.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
All mmos require your credit card to setup a subscription. Thats just how they work. Free trials don't work that way, but launch MMOs do and have.The "FACT" is that they said they had 1.7 million active subs, which yes, includes the free month. They also said "most" of those people were paying, and the date they were judging this on was after the free month was up for the initial purchase, which is where a major portion of the purchases were for the game.
The only part of your argument is that they are sugar coating the actual numbers, which is not a fact and is actually an opinion. So no, again, you have nothing backing your argument. I never said they are not losing population, but I said there is nothing to indicate that they are losing subs. The only numbers we have are from EA/Bioware right now, and those numbers indicate success.
Nice to see people admiting to having a clear agenda when positng here.
The quarterly report was posted after the 30 days but the data was up to Dec 31st 2011, if you read what it said
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011. "
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/electronic-arts-reports-q3-fy12-financial-results-2012-02-01
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
Why does it matter what any reviewer rates a game? They can't tell you if you will like a game or not, unless you are one of those sheep who let everyone else think for you. At best, a review can describe features and flaws of the game and you can make a better decision before you buy.
The releasing of the report was followed by a conference all with investors where it was made clear subscription numbers given were current as of Feb 1st.
There's a difference between buying the game and subscribing.
Regarding the second paragraph, I have everything "backing my argument" other than actual facts.
If you can come up with reasons you think populations aren't declining, other than your saying so, fire away. I'm all ears.
So answer one of my original questions to you. Apart from the fact that initial interest was huge (1.7 million), where is the good news from BW/EA since then? Anything at all.
Probably just means current as of Feb 1st from the querterly report ending Dec 31st 2011. They have no data from Jan 1st.
When you take into account copies bought but not yet used, that is virtually 100% retention rate, but official server stats and Xfire and loads of complaints say otherwise, unless people are still subbing, but not playing. I would belive they still had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st, if they sold 3 million, but 15% loss does not compute
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
Once again, you have nothing. You continue to act as if you are right based on no facts, claiming I don't have facts, then throwing my facts back at me as if I am somehow wrong. Infact, as stated above, the subs were current as of feb 1st. Once again, 1.7million only 2 weeks ago and nothing else even remotely related to facts has been stated otherwise. This is infact, the only fact I need to prove my argument that there is infact no indication to show that they are losing subscribers.
Finally you have something remotely recognizable as an argument! Too bad the server population capacity of the servers has been raised since launch. Xfire is not exactly data that means anything at all. People kept spouting that Rift was a failure due to Xfire stats, yet it is one of (if not the most) the successful games since WoW launched.
I like how you are twisting words they say around to benefit your argument. Let me put it to you straight: As of Feb 1st, 2012, there were 1.7 million people playing SWTOR. There is no other way to spin that.
Except it does not state that they had 1.7 million subs on Feb 1st. It is stated in the financial report and THEY state
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
I am not spinning anything, YOU are
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/electronic-arts-reports-q3-fy12-financial-results-2012-02-01
The results are based of the quarterly report ending Dec 31st which is stated by EA, nothing in there about Feb 1st at all
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
Its amazing people can say such ridiculous things with straight face. i am no SWTOR fanboy but even i know that it is not going to be a failure... not even close.
For someone who likes to talk about facts you surely got none.
Actually, considering the date said Feb 1st...and no where did they claim the subscriber numbers were current as of December 31st.
What this means, for you who apparently does not understand the legal jargen surrounding a share holder meeting, is that they have generated 1.7 million subs. They sold more then 2 million as of December 31st. They won't just lie to share holders, that would not be a wise idea.
-- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through more than 2 million units in a little over one month.
From a post I made at an earlier time. I was corrected when I thought that what they said still held true.
They need 500k subs to break even. Close to a million to be profitable. Anything less and it's an epic fail, or is that wrong?
*shrugs*
Care to show me a link where they say it needs close to a million sub to be profitable? and even if it is true isn't it a bit premature to jump on' SWTOR is a failure' band wagon? i am pretty sure that they re couped a large part of their investmennt from box sales alone by this time.
Actually, the server populations were raised after the headstart to lower que times. With higher population caps comes lower population indicators on the server status page, which does not prove anything one way or another. Since a population of "standard" from before could be light now,ect.
Care to join in then?
Prove to us that SWTOR is not losing subs hand over fist.
Difficult to prove isn't it when the only thing you have to hang on to are the initial sales figures?
Go online and screenshot the number of people in fleet. Lets face it, that's the only place anybody is right now.
Show me some other charts or stats that shows SWTOR is doing well.
Point me to the news articles that BW/EA are pushing out to show how successful the game is at this time.
[Mod Edit]
Yup, we've heard all that before, along with charts are worth nothing, or anything else other than official responses from an obviously biased source.
OK, I give up, your chance to prove the game is doing well dude. I wish you luck.
That last bit more like reads
- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has
1) generated 1.7 million active subscribers
and
2) sold through more than 2 million units in a little over one month.
and not
- Star Wars(R): The Old Republic(TM) has generated 1.7 million active subscribers and sold through more than 2 million units, in a little over one month.
It is possible to have sold more than 2 million units in a little over one month as of Dec 31st due to preorders of people buying in Nov and Dec. It is not possible to have generated over 1.7 million active subscribers in over a month, as of Dec 31st Dec 2011
The report was posted on Feb 1st, they would have not compiled and checked the results that fast, for public viewing. They would not want to lie to their share holders, inadvertantly by a mistake.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
If you are going to try to argue that it is failing, back it up. You have not yet as I have debunked every single pathetic attempt at an argument you created. I understand your rampant,jaded MMO-vet,agenda ridden,hatred of the game...but get real here. Nothing has indicated the game is going downhill, only the contrary.
Easy there bud you seem too sure about yourself. [Mod Edit]
It works both ways. if you want others to give facts you should back up your statements with facts too. So what facts you can provide to back up your claim that swtor is going to be the biggest failure?
Considering "most of the people" playing the game, of that 1.7 million people, were paying at that point. You can't say the data was not as of Feb 1st for the sub numbers since it was free up until that point
The game would not be launching in another territory if it was not a success.
Thats all I need. Further proof that it was data as of Feb 1st: http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/02/01/ea-reveals-swtor-subscription-and-sales-numbers-beats-financial/
If most of the people playing were paying as of December 31st, I dont know how, but they missed a free month somewhere
Please stay on topic and do not bait other users into personal attacks.