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.
Oh my, you've brought nothing to the table other than 1.7 million sales lol.
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.
It was free for most until Jan 20th, so was not free until Feb 1st, people would have been paying / actually subbing between Jan 20th and Feb 1st.
If it was a success, it would be releasing in another country at a later date, as they would be too busy dealing with maintaining the FULL servers which should be currently happening! The reason they stagged the launch was to slow down the traffic on the servers. There is not much traffic, so may as well let them in now, which they planned to anyway. They said they would open up to other countries, and would not just drop them.
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.
It was free for most until Jan 20th, so was not free until Feb 1st, people would have been paying / actually subbing between Jan 20th and Feb 1st.
If it was a success, it would be releasing in another country at a later date, as they would be too busy dealing with maintaining the FULL servers which should be currently happening! The reason they stagged the launch was to slow down the traffic on the servers. There is not much traffic, so may as well let them in now, which they planned to anyway. They said they would open up to other countries, and would not just drop them.
I won't re-establish my points over and over, but I will say this. By your own words, you claim if it was releasing in another country at a later date it would be a success. http://www.swtor.com/news/news-article/20120214
Not to mention how expensive localizing a game like this with full voice over would cost.
BioWare and LucasArts are excited to announce that Star Wars™: The Old Republic™ will officially launch in Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Singapore on March 1st, 2012!
The major flaw of SWTOR is that they made the exact same mistake Funcom made with AoC, they polished the absolute heck out of the initial levels and barely touched the endgame leaving it with a lot to be desired.
You can polish a turd as much as you want, but it's still going to be a turd.
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.
It was free for most until Jan 20th, so was not free until Feb 1st, people would have been paying / actually subbing between Jan 20th and Feb 1st.
If it was a success, it would be releasing in another country at a later date, as they would be too busy dealing with maintaining the FULL servers which should be currently happening! The reason they stagged the launch was to slow down the traffic on the servers. There is not much traffic, so may as well let them in now, which they planned to anyway. They said they would open up to other countries, and would not just drop them.
I won't re-establish my points over and over, but I will say this. By your own words, you claim if it was releasing in another country at a later date it would be a success. http://www.swtor.com/news/news-article/20120214
BioWare and LucasArts are excited to announce that Star Wars™: The Old Republic™ will officially launch in Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Singapore on March 1st, 2012!
I know it was releasing in March but I meant a later date as in July, not March being the later date!
7 is pretty accurate. Until you hit lvl 50 it is close to 9 and when you get to there it is close to 5.
How to create end game content ready for launch, that competes with games that have had years to produce it. It is unfair to expect that a game should have it all for launch... ...then again if you dont have anything to do (repetive driving around in ilum for pvp ie with few wz in between doesn't brake it for weeks)
Still sw-fan but swtor needs to pull up tons of great (at least few huge) tricks for end game and fast or we will see an unwanted end of story.. I think the important note is... ...not once has and mmorpg ricen back up when the fall starts and swtor has allready started it.... damn bioware make your move now!
The major flaw of SWTOR is that they made the exact same mistake Funcom made with AoC, they polished the absolute heck out of the initial levels and barely touched the endgame leaving it with a lot to be desired.
You can polish a turd as much as you want, but it's still going to be a turd.
I really doubt you even played AOC because AOC's problem started well before players even reached end game. Right out of tortage there was serious lack of content. I remember grinding mobs to level up in mid levels because of huge content gaps. There were no quests to level ina quest based game..yeah right.
Not to mention all the promised and hyped efatures by Funcom which never made to the game to this date. I still have the CE box with all the lies printed on back of the box. Add to that constant crashes and amount of bugs that were released with game.
If most of the people playing were paying as of December 31st, I dont know how, but they missed a free month somewhere
Missed this earlier, but I still do not see anything about Feb 1st, other than that is when the report went public, and as of Feb 1st most would be paying even if it was 1 million of the 1.7 million, where .7 million quit (or .6 million quit and .1 million still in free month)
Why stick figure of 1.7 million in a report that states it is quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011? If subs are so called growing and 1.7 million was as of Dec 31st 2011 then figues would have changed by then too, maybe increased to 1.8 million?
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
You're trying to say they don't know how many subs they have? You keep quoting one document that is only giving half the picture. In the conference call they were asked to clarify the sub number:
Eric F. Brown EA - "As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers." - Feb 1st, 2012
Also you're mssing the part in the statement that said the sub number was generated in "a little over a month". At the time you're claiming the number is coming from the game had been out for 10 days. So you're obviously wrong that they're talking about figures from the period ending Dec 31st.
Your second paragraph is just pure speculation. There have been plenty of times I've been subbed to an MMO and not logged in for a couple of months at a time because I was either busy or waiting for new content. Xfire numbers and server stats mean very little in relation to actual paying sub numbers.
Based on all the actual numbers we have they likely had a retetion rate from launch buyers of about 75%. At Feb 1st there were likely around 1 million paying subs and 700k on their included 1st month.
If most of the people playing were paying as of December 31st, I dont know how, but they missed a free month somewhere
Missed this earlier, but I still do not see anything about Feb 1st, other than that is when the report went public, and as of Feb 1st most would be paying even if it was 1 million of the 1.7 million, where .7 million quit (or .6 million quit and .1 million still in free month)
Why stick figure of 1.7 million in a report that states it is quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011? If subs are so called growing and 1.7 million was as of Dec 31st 2011 then figues would have changed by then too, maybe increased to 1.8 million?
You have to read between the lines a bit. The report is that 1.7 million were current as of Feb 1st (the date the report was announced) because that post you quoted had a link to a Q&A which stated "most of those" 1.7 million subs were infact, paying. If they were paying, they could not possibly have recorded 1.7 million on December 31st because the free month was not over yet.
Figures could have changed by now, for better or worse...but we won't know how well the game is doing until the next report. While pretty much everything at this point as to the overall success of the game is speculation, the reports so far still do not indicate anything other then success.
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
You're trying to say they don't know how many subs they have? You keep quoting one document that is only giving half the picture. In the conference call they were asked to clarify the sub number:
Eric F. Brown EA - "As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers." - Feb 1st, 2012
Also you're mssing the part in the statement that said the sub number was generated in "a little over a month". At the time you're claiming the number is coming from the game had been out for 10 days. So you're obviously wrong that they're talking about figures from the period ending Dec 31st.
Your second paragraph is just pure speculation. There have been plenty of times I've been subbed to an MMO and not logged in for a couple of months at a time because I was either busy or waiting for new content. Xfire numbers and server stats mean very little in relation to actual paying sub numbers.
Based on all the actual numbers we have they likely had a retetion rate from launch buyers of about 75%. At Feb 1st there were likely around 1 million paying subs and 700k on their included 1st month.
Erics statement is based off the quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011
I am not missing the bit " a little over a month" but that is associated with the 2 million copies sold not the 1.7 million sold
There is no punctuation in that statement, so can be read 2 ways. Nothing there is crystal clear that is figures based as at Feb 1st, just wishful thinking
The only date that is crystal clear is Dec31st 2011. If the figures in the report are not for Dec 31st 2011, then the figures in report is not valid, and EA are lying. To say the sub numbers are 1.7 again for Feb 1st is not right, it can not be 1.7 on Dec 31st and 1.7 again on Feb 1st.
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
You're trying to say they don't know how many subs they have? You keep quoting one document that is only giving half the picture. In the conference call they were asked to clarify the sub number:
Eric F. Brown EA - "As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers." - Feb 1st, 2012
Also you're mssing the part in the statement that said the sub number was generated in "a little over a month". At the time you're claiming the number is coming from the game had been out for 10 days. So you're obviously wrong that they're talking about figures from the period ending Dec 31st.
Your second paragraph is just pure speculation. There have been plenty of times I've been subbed to an MMO and not logged in for a couple of months at a time because I was either busy or waiting for new content. Xfire numbers and server stats mean very little in relation to actual paying sub numbers.
Based on all the actual numbers we have they likely had a retetion rate from launch buyers of about 75%. At Feb 1st there were likely around 1 million paying subs and 700k on their included 1st month.
Erics statement is based off the quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011
I am not missing the bit " a little over a month" but that is associated with the 2 million copies sold not the 1.7 million sold
There is no punctuation in that statement, so can be read 2 ways. Nothing there is crystal clear that is figures based as at Feb 1st, just wishful thinking
The only date that is crystal clear is Dec31st 2011. If the figures in the report are not for Dec 31st 2011, then the figures in report is not valid, and EA are lying. To say the sub numbers are 1.7 again for Feb 1st is not right, it can not be 1.7 on Dec 31st and 1.7 again on Feb 1st.
Refer to my post, the report was just unclear. It was clarified by Bioware that most of the 1.7 million people were actually paying, which means the reported number had to have been beyond the free month when the count was taken.
If most of the people playing were paying as of December 31st, I dont know how, but they missed a free month somewhere
Missed this earlier, but I still do not see anything about Feb 1st, other than that is when the report went public, and as of Feb 1st most would be paying even if it was 1 million of the 1.7 million, where .7 million quit (or .6 million quit and .1 million still in free month)
Why stick figure of 1.7 million in a report that states it is quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011? If subs are so called growing and 1.7 million was as of Dec 31st 2011 then figues would have changed by then too, maybe increased to 1.8 million?
You have to read between the lines a bit. The report is that 1.7 million were current as of Feb 1st (the date the report was announced) because that post you quoted had a link to a Q&A which stated "most of those" 1.7 million subs were infact, paying. If they were paying, they could not possibly have recorded 1.7 million on December 31st because the free month was not over yet.
Active subs counted as paid and on trial, so 1.7 on Dec 31st would be possible, and as of Feb 1st some people were paying. You do not have to work for the company to know that.
If most of the people playing were paying as of December 31st, I dont know how, but they missed a free month somewhere
Missed this earlier, but I still do not see anything about Feb 1st, other than that is when the report went public, and as of Feb 1st most would be paying even if it was 1 million of the 1.7 million, where .7 million quit (or .6 million quit and .1 million still in free month)
Why stick figure of 1.7 million in a report that states it is quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011? If subs are so called growing and 1.7 million was as of Dec 31st 2011 then figues would have changed by then too, maybe increased to 1.8 million?
You have to read between the lines a bit. The report is that 1.7 million were current as of Feb 1st (the date the report was announced) because that post you quoted had a link to a Q&A which stated "most of those" 1.7 million subs were infact, paying. If they were paying, they could not possibly have recorded 1.7 million on December 31st because the free month was not over yet.
Active subs counted as paid and on trial, so 1.7 on Dec 31st would be possible, and as of Feb 1st some people were paying. You do not have to work for the company to know that.
1.7 million people and most of them were paying..If that number was reported on December 31st, they were not beyond the free month. So that does not make sense unless it was actually Feb 1st that they counted it. The earliest day that people were paying was January 16th/17th. Meaning that no one was paying for the game before that date. Since the 1.7 million had people paying for the game, the count had to have been from that point forward. It only makes sense that on Feb 1st those people were still paying since it had not even been through the 2nd month. Notice "MOST" are paying at this point, meaning of the 1.7 million (indicated on Feb 1st) that most of the people were paying at this point.
"Active subscribers means anyone paying OR in their trial period. MOST of those 1.7m are paying at this point."
If most of the people playing were paying as of December 31st, I dont know how, but they missed a free month somewhere
Missed this earlier, but I still do not see anything about Feb 1st, other than that is when the report went public, and as of Feb 1st most would be paying even if it was 1 million of the 1.7 million, where .7 million quit (or .6 million quit and .1 million still in free month)
Why stick figure of 1.7 million in a report that states it is quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011? If subs are so called growing and 1.7 million was as of Dec 31st 2011 then figues would have changed by then too, maybe increased to 1.8 million?
You have to read between the lines a bit. The report is that 1.7 million were current as of Feb 1st (the date the report was announced) because that post you quoted had a link to a Q&A which stated "most of those" 1.7 million subs were infact, paying. If they were paying, they could not possibly have recorded 1.7 million on December 31st because the free month was not over yet.
Active subs counted as paid and on trial, so 1.7 on Dec 31st would be possible, and as of Feb 1st some people were paying. You do not have to work for the company to know that.
1.7 million people and most of them were paying..If that number was reported on December 31st, they were not beyond the free month. So that does not make sense unless it was actually Feb 1st that they counted it. The earliest day that people were paying was January 16th/17th. Meaning that no one was paying for the game before that date. Since the 1.7 million had people paying for the game, the count had to have been from that point forward. It only makes sense that on Feb 1st those people were still paying since it had not even been through the 2nd month. Notice "MOST" are paying at this point, meaning of the 1.7 million (indicated on Feb 1st) that most of the people were paying at this point.
"Active subscribers means anyone paying OR in their trial period. MOST of those 1.7m are paying at this point."
Yes, anyone can say that on Feb 1st, even me, as is obvious.
Active subscribers means anyone paying OR in their trial period means it is possible to record 1.7 million active subscribers on Dec 31st, as EVERYONE would be on their trial period on Dec 31st.
MOST of those 1.7m are paying at this point." Being said on Feb 1st, is just stating the obvious, as doubt they would lose more than 50% of the subscribers.
""Most" of the activated 1.7 M subscriptions are already paid for."
Now add: 2 M sales to ... retail. Because EA doesn't sell to players, they sell BOXES to RETAIL. (WAR had 1.2M copies sold to RETAIL and 800K subscribers after 5 weeks too EA said back then too !).
That's why EA spoke about 1.7 M subscribers, because you can't even play without setting up a subscription in SWTOR...
Those 300 K had nothing to do with retention as they were still sitting on dealers shelves... But they came in handy to give the impression of 85% retention. And so difficult questions were avoided...and dates as such didn't matter much. It was the impression that counted.
All crystal clear to me. And Brown already left the EA building...
As for their next report they will say:
" In the last months we added 400K new players that set up a subscription to our existing base while having sold around 2.5 M copies."
So giving the fans the idea of having 2.1 million subscriptions of which "most" paid already.
I am practically 100% sure they will take this route.
Actually it was 2 million sell-through which means that the boxes were sold to retailers and then bought by the customers.
If most of the people playing were paying as of December 31st, I dont know how, but they missed a free month somewhere
Missed this earlier, but I still do not see anything about Feb 1st, other than that is when the report went public, and as of Feb 1st most would be paying even if it was 1 million of the 1.7 million, where .7 million quit (or .6 million quit and .1 million still in free month)
Why stick figure of 1.7 million in a report that states it is quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011? If subs are so called growing and 1.7 million was as of Dec 31st 2011 then figues would have changed by then too, maybe increased to 1.8 million?
You have to read between the lines a bit. The report is that 1.7 million were current as of Feb 1st (the date the report was announced) because that post you quoted had a link to a Q&A which stated "most of those" 1.7 million subs were infact, paying. If they were paying, they could not possibly have recorded 1.7 million on December 31st because the free month was not over yet.
Active subs counted as paid and on trial, so 1.7 on Dec 31st would be possible, and as of Feb 1st some people were paying. You do not have to work for the company to know that.
1.7 million people and most of them were paying..If that number was reported on December 31st, they were not beyond the free month. So that does not make sense unless it was actually Feb 1st that they counted it. The earliest day that people were paying was January 16th/17th. Meaning that no one was paying for the game before that date. Since the 1.7 million had people paying for the game, the count had to have been from that point forward. It only makes sense that on Feb 1st those people were still paying since it had not even been through the 2nd month. Notice "MOST" are paying at this point, meaning of the 1.7 million (indicated on Feb 1st) that most of the people were paying at this point.
"Active subscribers means anyone paying OR in their trial period. MOST of those 1.7m are paying at this point."
Yes, anyone can say that on Feb 1st, even me, as is obvious.
Active subscribers means anyone paying OR in their trial period means it is possible to record 1.7 million active subscribers on Dec 31st, as EVERYONE would be on their trial period on Dec 31st.
MOST of those 1.7m are paying at this point." Being said on Feb 1st, is just stating the obvious, as doubt they would lose more than 50% of the subscribers.
So yeah, again it just further proves that there is nothing indicating this game is a failure just yet. They are making money anyways, which is a success. Maybe not in some people's eyes (cause they don't like it) but that is the reality of it. Maybe it will change in the future, but for now there is nothing to indicate that it has already changed.
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
You're trying to say they don't know how many subs they have? You keep quoting one document that is only giving half the picture. In the conference call they were asked to clarify the sub number:
Eric F. Brown EA - "As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers." - Feb 1st, 2012
Also you're mssing the part in the statement that said the sub number was generated in "a little over a month". At the time you're claiming the number is coming from the game had been out for 10 days. So you're obviously wrong that they're talking about figures from the period ending Dec 31st.
Your second paragraph is just pure speculation. There have been plenty of times I've been subbed to an MMO and not logged in for a couple of months at a time because I was either busy or waiting for new content. Xfire numbers and server stats mean very little in relation to actual paying sub numbers.
Based on all the actual numbers we have they likely had a retetion rate from launch buyers of about 75%. At Feb 1st there were likely around 1 million paying subs and 700k on their included 1st month.
Erics statement is based off the quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011
I am not missing the bit " a little over a month" but that is associated with the 2 million copies sold not the 1.7 million sold
There is no punctuation in that statement, so can be read 2 ways. Nothing there is crystal clear that is figures based as at Feb 1st, just wishful thinking
The only date that is crystal clear is Dec31st 2011. If the figures in the report are not for Dec 31st 2011, then the figures in report is not valid, and EA are lying. To say the sub numbers are 1.7 again for Feb 1st is not right, it can not be 1.7 on Dec 31st and 1.7 again on Feb 1st.
You're really reaching here. Direct quotes from the conference call:
"Frank D. Gibeau
Thanks, Eric. Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3, including some perspective on the launch and consumer experience with Star Wars: The Old Republic. I'll also take you through some of the games that we intend to release this quarter to complete our fiscal year."
Clearly they are not ONLY talking about what happened last quarter. He goes on to say:
"Our third global blockbuster in the quarter was Star Wars: The Old Republic....Let me offer some metrics on purchase and subscription that will help you understand this business. As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers. The rest have either not started playing yet or have opted out. This is an outstanding start for an MMO, and the metrics on engagement suggests players are loving the game. Unique log-ins are averaging about 1 million per day, and their average playtime is approximately 4 hours per day."
He is clearly talking about as things stood at the time of the conference call. Of the 2 million boxes sold since launch until Feb 1st, they have 300k who had cancelled or not started yet (likely a very small number). Before you are no longer an ACTIVE subscriber your subscription time has had to have run out. That means that approx. 300k people from launch had cancelled. If you bought the game in Jan you're still on your first month and your sub is considered "active". This is standard practice when talking about sub numbers.
They clarified this again later when someone asked a question:
Brian J. Pitz - UBS Investment Bank, Research Division
Great. And just one really quick follow-up. Can you give us a sense for how many of those 1.7 million active subs we could expect to convert to paying subs after the initial free month? How should we kind of think about that?
Answer:
Frank D. Gibeau
Yes, let me -- maybe what I can do is I'll define active subscribers for you, and then give you a little color on that. We're not going to be able to talk too deeply on conversion just because it's so early in the life of the product. We're only 10 days past our first month anniversary.
Meaning he's talking about Feb 1st since Jan 20th was the 1 month anniversary. He continues:
But essentially, we're using the industry standard for active subscribers. If anyone paying a subscription or playing on an active prepaid timecard, and those who have registered to play are still in the trial subscription period. I can tell you that the majority of the 1.7 million are paying subscribers for us currently, which is great considering we're only, like I said, 42 days into the launch, and you have a 30-day trial period. So a lot of people are voting that they want to be a part of the service and are engaged, which is great news.
Can we stop with the spin now? They were clearly talking current as of Feb 1st.
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
You're trying to say they don't know how many subs they have? You keep quoting one document that is only giving half the picture. In the conference call they were asked to clarify the sub number:
Eric F. Brown EA - "As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers." - Feb 1st, 2012
Also you're mssing the part in the statement that said the sub number was generated in "a little over a month". At the time you're claiming the number is coming from the game had been out for 10 days. So you're obviously wrong that they're talking about figures from the period ending Dec 31st.
Your second paragraph is just pure speculation. There have been plenty of times I've been subbed to an MMO and not logged in for a couple of months at a time because I was either busy or waiting for new content. Xfire numbers and server stats mean very little in relation to actual paying sub numbers.
Based on all the actual numbers we have they likely had a retetion rate from launch buyers of about 75%. At Feb 1st there were likely around 1 million paying subs and 700k on their included 1st month.
Erics statement is based off the quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011
I am not missing the bit " a little over a month" but that is associated with the 2 million copies sold not the 1.7 million sold
There is no punctuation in that statement, so can be read 2 ways. Nothing there is crystal clear that is figures based as at Feb 1st, just wishful thinking
The only date that is crystal clear is Dec31st 2011. If the figures in the report are not for Dec 31st 2011, then the figures in report is not valid, and EA are lying. To say the sub numbers are 1.7 again for Feb 1st is not right, it can not be 1.7 on Dec 31st and 1.7 again on Feb 1st.
You're really reaching here. Direct quotes from the conference call:
"Frank D. Gibeau
Thanks, Eric. Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3, including some perspective on the launch and consumer experience with Star Wars: The Old Republic. I'll also take you through some of the games that we intend to release this quarter to complete our fiscal year."
Clearly they are not ONLY talking about what happened last quarter. He goes on to say:
"Our third global blockbuster in the quarter was Star Wars: The Old Republic....Let me offer some metrics on purchase and subscription that will help you understand this business. As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers. The rest have either not started playing yet or have opted out. This is an outstanding start for an MMO, and the metrics on engagement suggests players are loving the game. Unique log-ins are averaging about 1 million per day, and their average playtime is approximately 4 hours per day."
He is clearly talking about as things stood at the time of the conference call. Of the 2 million boxes sold since launch until Feb 1st, they have 300k who had cancelled or not started yet (likely a very small number). Before you are no longer an ACTIVE subscriber your subscription time has had to have run out. That means that approx. 300k people from launch had cancelled. If you bought the game in Jan you're still on your first month and your sub is considered "active". This is standard practice when talking about sub numbers.
They clarified this again later when someone asked a question:
Brian J. Pitz - UBS Investment Bank, Research Division
Great. And just one really quick follow-up. Can you give us a sense for how many of those 1.7 million active subs we could expect to convert to paying subs after the initial free month? How should we kind of think about that?
Answer:
Frank D. Gibeau
Yes, let me -- maybe what I can do is I'll define active subscribers for you, and then give you a little color on that. We're not going to be able to talk too deeply on conversion just because it's so early in the life of the product. We're only 10 days past our first month anniversary.
Meaning he's talking about Feb 1st since Jan 20th was the 1 month anniversary. He continues:
But essentially, we're using the industry standard for active subscribers. If anyone paying a subscription or playing on an active prepaid timecard, and those who have registered to play are still in the trial subscription period. I can tell you that the majority of the 1.7 million are paying subscribers for us currently, which is great considering we're only, like I said, 42 days into the launch, and you have a 30-day trial period. So a lot of people are voting that they want to be a part of the service and are engaged, which is great news.
Can we stop with the spin now? They were clearly talking current as of Feb 1st.
There is no spin except by you. They are talking Q3 numbers, which the quarter report figures ended Dec 31st.
"Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3"
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
"--Star Wars: The Old Republic Has More Than 1.7 Million Active Subscribers " is right above it, taken straight from the financial report
You can not get crystal clear than that, and putting any relation to those figures to Feb 1st, is nothing but confusion, and wanting it to be true, because they were discussing the Q3 report which contained financial results ending Dec 31st, on Feb 1st. If the 1.7 figure is based on 1st Feb then that Financial Report is inacurate, which can not be.
There is no spin except by you. They are talking Q3 numbers, which the quarter report figures ended Dec 31st.
"Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3"
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
"--Star Wars: The Old Republic Has More Than 1.7 Million Active Subscribers " is right above it, taken straight from the financial report
You can not get crystal clear than that, and putting any relation to those figures to Feb 1st, is nothing but confusion, and wanting it to be true, because they were discussing the Q3 report which contained financial results ending Dec 31st, on Feb 1st. If the 1.7 figure is based on 1st Feb then that Financial Report is inacurate, which can not be.
LOL nice spin. Ignore 98% of what I quoted and just pick the one half sentence that supposedly backs up your claim. I mean, you completely ignore the very next sentence where he starts talking about the current quarter and then pretend that everything he is talking about is stuff from before Dec 31st. Anyway, I'm done here, it's clear you're just being willfully ignorant at this point.
There is no spin except by you. They are talking Q3 numbers, which the quarter report figures ended Dec 31st.
"Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3"
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
"--Star Wars: The Old Republic Has More Than 1.7 Million Active Subscribers " is right above it, taken straight from the financial report
You can not get crystal clear than that, and putting any relation to those figures to Feb 1st, is nothing but confusion, and wanting it to be true, because they were discussing the Q3 report which contained financial results ending Dec 31st, on Feb 1st. If the 1.7 figure is based on 1st Feb then that Financial Report is inacurate, which can not be.
LOL nice spin. Ignore 98% of what I quoted and just pick the one half sentence that supposedly backs up your claim. I mean, you completely ignore the very next sentence where he starts talking about the current quarter and then pretend that everything he is talking about is stuff from before Dec 31st. Anyway, I'm done here, it's clear you're just being willfully ignorant at this point.
I am not ignoring anything, the Financial Report is fact, and provided to the share holder, and the figures they state for sub number for Q3 ending Dec 31st 2011 in that report is 1.7.
Using that discussion is spinning the figure to YOURadvantage as is taking the 1.7 million figure from that report to Feb 1st, when it only belongs in that report, ending Dec 31st.
There is no spin except by you. They are talking Q3 numbers, which the quarter report figures ended Dec 31st.
"Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3"
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
"--Star Wars: The Old Republic Has More Than 1.7 Million Active Subscribers " is right above it, taken straight from the financial report
You can not get crystal clear than that, and putting any relation to those figures to Feb 1st, is nothing but confusion, and wanting it to be true, because they were discussing the Q3 report which contained financial results ending Dec 31st, on Feb 1st. If the 1.7 figure is based on 1st Feb then that Financial Report is inacurate, which can not be.
LOL nice spin. Ignore 98% of what I quoted and just pick the one half sentence that supposedly backs up your claim. I mean, you completely ignore the very next sentence where he starts talking about the current quarter and then pretend that everything he is talking about is stuff from before Dec 31st. Anyway, I'm done here, it's clear you're just being willfully ignorant at this point.
I am not ignoring anything, the Financial Report is fact, and provided to the share holder, and the figures they state for sub number for Q3 ending Dec 31st 2011 in that report is 1.7.
Using that discussion is spinning the figure to YOURadvantage as is taking the 1.7 million figure from that report to Feb 1st, when it only belongs in that report, ending Dec 31st.
I think this also confirms that things have been heading downhill from DEC 31st no doubt, so the 1.7million figure seems highly unlikely.
There is no spin except by you. They are talking Q3 numbers, which the quarter report figures ended Dec 31st.
"Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3"
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
"--Star Wars: The Old Republic Has More Than 1.7 Million Active Subscribers " is right above it, taken straight from the financial report
You can not get crystal clear than that, and putting any relation to those figures to Feb 1st, is nothing but confusion, and wanting it to be true, because they were discussing the Q3 report which contained financial results ending Dec 31st, on Feb 1st. If the 1.7 figure is based on 1st Feb then that Financial Report is inacurate, which can not be.
LOL nice spin. Ignore 98% of what I quoted and just pick the one half sentence that supposedly backs up your claim. I mean, you completely ignore the very next sentence where he starts talking about the current quarter and then pretend that everything he is talking about is stuff from before Dec 31st. Anyway, I'm done here, it's clear you're just being willfully ignorant at this point.
Comments
Yeah, a bunch of people bought the biggest IP in gaming history at Christmas!
Just thought I'd quote this part though:
EA has reported much better sales than expected for the December quarter
So it was reported Feb 1st. And...
It was free for most until Jan 20th, so was not free until Feb 1st, people would have been paying / actually subbing between Jan 20th and Feb 1st.
If it was a success, it would be releasing in another country at a later date, as they would be too busy dealing with maintaining the FULL servers which should be currently happening! The reason they stagged the launch was to slow down the traffic on the servers. There is not much traffic, so may as well let them in now, which they planned to anyway. They said they would open up to other countries, and would not just drop them.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
Is this aimed at me?
I apologise if so, although I feel it's the other way around.
Last post on the subject.
I won't re-establish my points over and over, but I will say this. By your own words, you claim if it was releasing in another country at a later date it would be a success. http://www.swtor.com/news/news-article/20120214
Not to mention how expensive localizing a game like this with full voice over would cost.
BioWare and LucasArts are excited to announce that Star Wars™: The Old Republic™ will officially launch in Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Singapore on March 1st, 2012!
I'd say the review is pretty spot on.
The major flaw of SWTOR is that they made the exact same mistake Funcom made with AoC, they polished the absolute heck out of the initial levels and barely touched the endgame leaving it with a lot to be desired.
You can polish a turd as much as you want, but it's still going to be a turd.
I know it was releasing in March but I meant a later date as in July, not March being the later date!
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
7 is pretty accurate. Until you hit lvl 50 it is close to 9 and when you get to there it is close to 5.
How to create end game content ready for launch, that competes with games that have had years to produce it. It is unfair to expect that a game should have it all for launch... ...then again if you dont have anything to do (repetive driving around in ilum for pvp ie with few wz in between doesn't brake it for weeks)
Still sw-fan but swtor needs to pull up tons of great (at least few huge) tricks for end game and fast or we will see an unwanted end of story.. I think the important note is... ...not once has and mmorpg ricen back up when the fall starts and swtor has allready started it.... damn bioware make your move now!
I really doubt you even played AOC because AOC's problem started well before players even reached end game. Right out of tortage there was serious lack of content. I remember grinding mobs to level up in mid levels because of huge content gaps. There were no quests to level ina quest based game..yeah right.
Not to mention all the promised and hyped efatures by Funcom which never made to the game to this date. I still have the CE box with all the lies printed on back of the box. Add to that constant crashes and amount of bugs that were released with game.
So nope SWTOR has nothing in common with AOC.
Missed this earlier, but I still do not see anything about Feb 1st, other than that is when the report went public, and as of Feb 1st most would be paying even if it was 1 million of the 1.7 million, where .7 million quit (or .6 million quit and .1 million still in free month)
Why stick figure of 1.7 million in a report that states it is quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011? If subs are so called growing and 1.7 million was as of Dec 31st 2011 then figues would have changed by then too, maybe increased to 1.8 million?
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
You're trying to say they don't know how many subs they have? You keep quoting one document that is only giving half the picture. In the conference call they were asked to clarify the sub number:
Eric F. Brown EA - "As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers." - Feb 1st, 2012
Also you're mssing the part in the statement that said the sub number was generated in "a little over a month". At the time you're claiming the number is coming from the game had been out for 10 days. So you're obviously wrong that they're talking about figures from the period ending Dec 31st.
Your second paragraph is just pure speculation. There have been plenty of times I've been subbed to an MMO and not logged in for a couple of months at a time because I was either busy or waiting for new content. Xfire numbers and server stats mean very little in relation to actual paying sub numbers.
Based on all the actual numbers we have they likely had a retetion rate from launch buyers of about 75%. At Feb 1st there were likely around 1 million paying subs and 700k on their included 1st month.
You have to read between the lines a bit. The report is that 1.7 million were current as of Feb 1st (the date the report was announced) because that post you quoted had a link to a Q&A which stated "most of those" 1.7 million subs were infact, paying. If they were paying, they could not possibly have recorded 1.7 million on December 31st because the free month was not over yet.
Figures could have changed by now, for better or worse...but we won't know how well the game is doing until the next report. While pretty much everything at this point as to the overall success of the game is speculation, the reports so far still do not indicate anything other then success.
Erics statement is based off the quarterly report ending Dec 31st 2011
I am not missing the bit " a little over a month" but that is associated with the 2 million copies sold not the 1.7 million sold
There is no punctuation in that statement, so can be read 2 ways. Nothing there is crystal clear that is figures based as at Feb 1st, just wishful thinking
The only date that is crystal clear is Dec31st 2011. If the figures in the report are not for Dec 31st 2011, then the figures in report is not valid, and EA are lying. To say the sub numbers are 1.7 again for Feb 1st is not right, it can not be 1.7 on Dec 31st and 1.7 again on Feb 1st.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
Refer to my post, the report was just unclear. It was clarified by Bioware that most of the 1.7 million people were actually paying, which means the reported number had to have been beyond the free month when the count was taken.
Active subs counted as paid and on trial, so 1.7 on Dec 31st would be possible, and as of Feb 1st some people were paying. You do not have to work for the company to know that.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
1.7 million people and most of them were paying..If that number was reported on December 31st, they were not beyond the free month. So that does not make sense unless it was actually Feb 1st that they counted it. The earliest day that people were paying was January 16th/17th. Meaning that no one was paying for the game before that date. Since the 1.7 million had people paying for the game, the count had to have been from that point forward. It only makes sense that on Feb 1st those people were still paying since it had not even been through the 2nd month. Notice "MOST" are paying at this point, meaning of the 1.7 million (indicated on Feb 1st) that most of the people were paying at this point.
"Active subscribers means anyone paying OR in their trial period. MOST of those 1.7m are paying at this point."
Yes, anyone can say that on Feb 1st, even me, as is obvious.
Active subscribers means anyone paying OR in their trial period means it is possible to record 1.7 million active subscribers on Dec 31st, as EVERYONE would be on their trial period on Dec 31st.
MOST of those 1.7m are paying at this point." Being said on Feb 1st, is just stating the obvious, as doubt they would lose more than 50% of the subscribers.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
Actually it was 2 million sell-through which means that the boxes were sold to retailers and then bought by the customers.
So yeah, again it just further proves that there is nothing indicating this game is a failure just yet. They are making money anyways, which is a success. Maybe not in some people's eyes (cause they don't like it) but that is the reality of it. Maybe it will change in the future, but for now there is nothing to indicate that it has already changed.
You're really reaching here. Direct quotes from the conference call:
"Frank D. Gibeau
Thanks, Eric. Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3, including some perspective on the launch and consumer experience with Star Wars: The Old Republic. I'll also take you through some of the games that we intend to release this quarter to complete our fiscal year."
Clearly they are not ONLY talking about what happened last quarter. He goes on to say:
"Our third global blockbuster in the quarter was Star Wars: The Old Republic....Let me offer some metrics on purchase and subscription that will help you understand this business. As John stated, we have sold through 2 million units of the game since December. We currently have a little over 1.7 million active subscribers. The rest have either not started playing yet or have opted out. This is an outstanding start for an MMO, and the metrics on engagement suggests players are loving the game. Unique log-ins are averaging about 1 million per day, and their average playtime is approximately 4 hours per day."
He is clearly talking about as things stood at the time of the conference call. Of the 2 million boxes sold since launch until Feb 1st, they have 300k who had cancelled or not started yet (likely a very small number). Before you are no longer an ACTIVE subscriber your subscription time has had to have run out. That means that approx. 300k people from launch had cancelled. If you bought the game in Jan you're still on your first month and your sub is considered "active". This is standard practice when talking about sub numbers.
They clarified this again later when someone asked a question:
Brian J. Pitz - UBS Investment Bank, Research Division
Great. And just one really quick follow-up. Can you give us a sense for how many of those 1.7 million active subs we could expect to convert to paying subs after the initial free month? How should we kind of think about that?
Answer:
Frank D. Gibeau
Yes, let me -- maybe what I can do is I'll define active subscribers for you, and then give you a little color on that. We're not going to be able to talk too deeply on conversion just because it's so early in the life of the product. We're only 10 days past our first month anniversary.
Meaning he's talking about Feb 1st since Jan 20th was the 1 month anniversary. He continues:
But essentially, we're using the industry standard for active subscribers. If anyone paying a subscription or playing on an active prepaid timecard, and those who have registered to play are still in the trial subscription period. I can tell you that the majority of the 1.7 million are paying subscribers for us currently, which is great considering we're only, like I said, 42 days into the launch, and you have a 30-day trial period. So a lot of people are voting that they want to be a part of the service and are engaged, which is great news.
Can we stop with the spin now? They were clearly talking current as of Feb 1st.
Thanks DaRoamer for clarifying it further, hopefully they can open up the blinders they have on and see this.
There is no spin except by you. They are talking Q3 numbers, which the quarter report figures ended Dec 31st.
"Today, I'm going to take you through some highlights from our biggest games in Q3"
"Electronic Arts Inc. EA +0.11% today announced preliminary financial results for its third fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011."
"--Star Wars: The Old Republic Has More Than 1.7 Million Active Subscribers " is right above it, taken straight from the financial report
You can not get crystal clear than that, and putting any relation to those figures to Feb 1st, is nothing but confusion, and wanting it to be true, because they were discussing the Q3 report which contained financial results ending Dec 31st, on Feb 1st. If the 1.7 figure is based on 1st Feb then that Financial Report is inacurate, which can not be.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
LOL nice spin. Ignore 98% of what I quoted and just pick the one half sentence that supposedly backs up your claim. I mean, you completely ignore the very next sentence where he starts talking about the current quarter and then pretend that everything he is talking about is stuff from before Dec 31st. Anyway, I'm done here, it's clear you're just being willfully ignorant at this point.
I am not ignoring anything, the Financial Report is fact, and provided to the share holder, and the figures they state for sub number for Q3 ending Dec 31st 2011 in that report is 1.7.
Using that discussion is spinning the figure to YOURadvantage as is taking the 1.7 million figure from that report to Feb 1st, when it only belongs in that report, ending Dec 31st.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
I think this also confirms that things have been heading downhill from DEC 31st no doubt, so the 1.7million figure seems highly unlikely.
Except the rest of the direct quotes I posted.