Well EA 150million to make SW:TOR you know what that means right?
No matter what they will do they go aggresively for the MASS, that means it will be playble on every pc, it will be extreme themepark and fluffy so from 8 to 80years can play it.
What we also will see in SW:TOR is limited freedom involvement by EA to controll everything so players have to do what EA say.
And innovation?
Sure to make it even more playble and fast and easy then WoW.
Knowing EA swtor will maybe even downfall of mmorpgs or at least end of innovation and indys who give up even try.
Or maybe we need failor of big companys so they leave mmo industry and small companys can take over and make there innovative fresh new old/new school games that many wanne play becouse there sick of WoWs out there.
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009..... In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
EA's CEO said last year that your mom will be able to play any of their new games. So don't expect anything from them which requires skill, stratergy or dedication. There will be a games in production before he released his grand vision to the world so STOR may escape the worst, but I am sure he has already asked them if Luke's mum could play it.
People forget that when a new and anticipated game comes out, tons of people in WoW go and try it. For the last several years this has almost always disappointed because the new games are CRAP (except perhaps LOTRO but that has a more specialized audience, imho). A lot of WoW players keep playing because there's nothing better. I think it is very reasonable to conclude that TOR will be better in a number of ways and at the very least just as good and refreshingly different.
TOR has:
No Holy Trinity combat system (and this doesn't mean people don't have strengths and weaknesses or roles in combat)
You always fight multiple enemies, so you feel awesome.
Full voice acting (I personally think this is a nice perk, though minor).
Quests that have choices AND consequences (this is HUGE, because it helps remove the feeling that you are grinding).
A Group System that supports the above quest system
An awesome and very, very popular genre, more so than WoW.
Will not be painful like that last Star Wars MMO (I know some love it, but washing dishes isn't why most people play games, particularly ones in an action setting).
Two sides, but both sides have good and evil (you can play a good Sith or bad Jedi).
Long beta test of over a year and 6 year Dev time (that means that a really good company like Bioware will deliver a very, very polished game something we've lacked the last 5 years or so).
Standard end-game stuff and group quests (people that think otherwise are wrong, Bioware has explicitly talked about this and how there will also be new end-game stuff that we haven't seen in an MMO)
Large open world (yes, again the people that think differently don't know what they are talking about).
A company dedicated to story, setting, and player CHOICE making an MMO. We've not had this before.
There's every reason to think this will be insanely popular. The people who wrongly think it will be awful will change their minds when people who try it out tell them otherwise (or before that when more information is released).
Personally I'd be surprised if it only has 2 million subscribers.
Also, I play WoW some still and a lot of people are kind of burned out with it but have no other good MMO options. Blizzard seems to more and more focus on gear GRIND and their expansions don't do much more than go to total grind when you get to the end-game (and that happens within a few weeks at most after an expansion). There's not a lot of replayability in WoW anymore. Even with an expansion coming out later this year, I think the time will be ripe next year to steal away a lot of WoW players. Even grabbing 10% of the WoW playerbase would go more than halfway towards meeting TOR's sub goal.
Beyond that I think the MMO community is hungry for something new and well made. TOR should deliver on both fronts and do very well because of it.
But then again : it is very obvious - even for staunch WoW fans- Blizzard is gradually " letting go " of the WoW -franchise. The mere fact a lead developer was specualting on it utilizing a f2p model in the future was indication of that. But we know zilch about their next MMO on which a large number of developers have been working for a long time now .
I also disagree with folks citing past successes of Bioware with regard to RPG's to use as an argument to assume SW:TOR will succeed . We all know - or should know - an MMO is not the same as a very linear ( due to its nature ) RPG . Bioware has been great at " storytelling" but there is no way to incorporate that - efficiently - in a persistant world which is the very basis of any MMO .SW:TOR will require a sandbox environment and that is something Bioware hasn't done yet ( unless they plan on doing everything instanced in which case it's hardly an MMO and more than likely won't succeed ). I even find the "boxed in" environments annoying in their RPG's occasionally , as opposed to Bethesda titles which at least give you the feeling of a sandbox game .
Add Aion - 20 milion, to the list (reference) and ABP around the same budget.
Then assuming SWTOR budget is 150 milion seems very unlikely. First as pointed by others the OP forgot to add the income of the box sales then for such a "big" MMO you need way more than 25 people just to maintain the infrastructure live (3 data centers 2 US and one EU at least), feed the customer service, all managers and not to say the live team devs.
About numbers Blizzard has spent over $200 milions for WoW till september 2008 and has over 2000 customer service reps round the world. ==> 150 million just to develop the game would be foolish
100 million while big would have been more reasonable, but if you'd asked me I would have pointed 50 maybe 70ish million and even with that budget you can make one AoC plus one Aion... and add one Everquest 2 if you are in the upper bracket.
Well, I'd think the fact that they have to pay a slew of actors for voice-work (and a lot more of it than in a single RPG) would account for another couple of million, and also, your figures aren't adjusted for inflation. Even 5 years makes a bit of a difference to the value of a dollar. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Bioware are going to have a massive ad campaign (and they will), and that they've allocated x% of box-sales revenue to pay for that. They only get a percentage of the box-price back anyway so it makes sense to allow ad/marketing spend to cancel box revenue out to a certain extent (unless thay do sell millions of boxes).
Blizz did not start with 2000 CSRs, and neither will Bioware/EA/LA, they'll start at launch with a core team and expand as needed. That's just good business sense. Remember, the game is far from being live - the 25-man dev/testing team they have now is all they need - at the moment.
We can't say anything about the foolishness or otherwise of such a big investment until we see, and play, the final product.
We can speculate all we want, but I'd lay money none of us will hit the nail on the head as regards the financial success or otherwise of the game.
1. I also disagree with folks citing past successes of Bioware with regard to RPG's to use as an argument to assume SW:TOR will succeed .
2. We all know - or should know - an MMO is not the same as a very linear ( due to its nature ) RPG . Bioware has been great at " storytelling" but there is no way to incorporate that - efficiently - in a persistant world which is the very basis of any MMO .SW:TOR will require a sandbox environment and that is something Bioware hasn't done yet ( unless they plan on doing everything instanced in which case it's hardly an MMO and more than likely won't succeed ).
3. I even find the "boxed in" environments annoying in their RPG's occasionally , as opposed to Bethesda titles which at least give you the feeling of a sandbox game .
1. Bioware has ALWAYS made good games. There simply aren't exceptions. That's pretty dang impressive and a sign to think they can handle making a good game even if there's a bit of a genre change (especially if they are bringing their big talents to that new genre, in this case story-telling with player choice). Not saying you can be 100% certain, but there's good reason to be optimisitic, especially since they are not rushing anything out.
2. I disagree with this assertion very strongly on many levels.
First, while certain basic events in Bioware RPGs are "linear" and the same, that doesn't mean the story itself is the same or linear. Take BG2 as an example. Irenicus is after you whether you are good or evil (or neutral). He's a powerful force that you necessarily must confront because he gives you no option. However, the manner in which you confront him can vary quite a lot. You can use and abuse everyone you run into, kill indescriminately; you can help those you run into even if it isn't easy; or a number of other things. Yes, the chapters of the game are the same for every character and there is a certain degree of linearity, but in an ethical sense at the very least it isn't linear at all and that's the meat and potatoes of many good stories. Giving choices that MATTER is a big deal in the MMO world.
Secondly, most MMOs are ridiculously linear. You can choose what quest you pick up and you either do it or don't. You have no choice how you do it. You start with low-level ones and work your way up. There's little to no anime to the world.
Thirdly, the idea that Sandbox MMOs somehow better convey a story is flat-out wrong. Sandboxes generally provide pretty poor natural antagonists that aren't very proactive. There are no big figures pushing the story forward, no big plot arcs, etc. Yes, other players doing stuff isn't anything to sneeze at, but that's NOT story 99% of the time.
Fourthly, given my above points, the idea that they can't tell a story or have strong story themes in an MMO is rather silly. At a minimum level, take a game like WoW. Take quest sequences and put them all together into big quests. Now provide ethical and other choices along the way on how you deal with certain revelations during the quest. Then make sure those choices have consequences during the questline. If you want to be more ambitious, as Bioware is, make sure there are consequences AFTER that quest is over. I think you are operating under the false assumption that story has to have global implications otherwise it isn't story. That's hardly the truth. Your choices are just as meaningful if they only have local implications, even if those implications are so localized they only affect YOU (or you and the people adventuring with you).
Fifth, I'd also like to add I think there is room in TOR to have some larger implications for some player actions. I think some of the end-game will be story-based in some manner. You can do this a number of ways with each player contributing a little to the end result, some PvP/PvE mixes, and other things. That's my guess anyhow, but we'll have to wait and see what they come up with. I'm not going to pretend they are limited by my imagination.
3. Well, for what it is worth, they are going to have large and expansive worlds as they've said several times. Ones that have massive sections with no instancing and you can run into other players (I believe a Dev said 90% of the game was like that).
I don't think they'll maintain those number. Sure Bioware is going to sell many boxes. But if this game doesn't shine like the brightest star in the universe, they're going to drop subs after the first 30 days just like every other game that has come along since WoW. The hype alone is going to kill the game. *cough* Aion.
Saying it will do well simply because it's Bioware doesn't cut it with some people. I think Bioware games are boring personally. There were a few I thought were good, sure. I loved KOTOR, BG and Jade Empire. But the thing that bugs me about them is they rehash the same game over and over. The only thing that really changes is cosmetics and names. They've really shown me nothing that proves they can pull of a whole different genre. They're a one trick pony to me so far.
Now I'm not saying I hope it bombs. I do love Star Wars and hope we get a good game out of it. But after buying other "sure things" such as WAR and AOC, I am skepitical. Not just with Bioware either. It's the first time since '97 that I am excited for no announced mmo at all. They keep going down the shitter with every new one that comes out.
About numbers Blizzard has spent over $200 milions for WoW till september 2008 and has over 2000 customer service reps round the world. ==> 150 million just to develop the game would be foolish
100 million while big would have been more reasonable, but if you'd asked me I would have pointed 50 maybe 70ish million and even with that budget you can make one AoC plus one Aion... and add one Everquest 2 if you are in the upper bracket.
You read the G4TV link wrong. Blizz has spent 200M on Wow SINCE 2004, ie AFTER launch, ie NOT INCLUDING development cost.
From your link: According to Activision, Blizzard has spent over $200 million on World of Warcraft since its launch.
Thanks for the highlight, was late when I posted it.
Still we can agree $150 million is really wrong and even $100 million to make the game would be quite insane. Now if you take into account how much EA paid to buy BioWare that's another story
They will get 1 million sales no doubt! If star Trek, and AOC can do it, you better believe that SWTOR will. Im nto sure i agree with the hypothesis that was laid out in this article, but overall i dont believe that SWTOR will have a problem with numbers unless in teh leveling process, things become too repetative, or it lacks the star wars luster!
I don't think they'll maintain those number. Sure Bioware is going to sell many boxes. But if this game doesn't shine like the brightest star in the universe, they're going to drop subs after the first 30 days just like every other game that has come along since WoW. The hype alone is going to kill the game. *cough* Aion.
Eh, those other games didn't shine at all. They dropped subs after 30 days because they were awful AND rushed. We can be certain given a 6 year dev time that TOR is not rushed, and I doubt it is going to be a bad game either.
And hype killed Aion because it is a grindfest that advertises flying when you don't actually get to fly that much. Same sort of hype that results in dropped subs -- bad games with hype fail, just like bad games drop subs after the first month. It just so happens we've had several years with pretty much only bad games coming out in the MMO genre.
I actually don't give a rats arse about how much they spend on it.
I am a gamer, I love games and all i can hope for is that it will be a great one that will 'love me long time' .... who cares how much money they throw at it
To repeat myself, i hope as there is no way of telling yet, despite all the "knowledgeable" people here!
Has I posted before this might be the next BIG thing but alas EA are very poor in technical issues look at the thousands of posts on the Battlefield series forums (Fps) the login server is always down patches take far to long to mature when thousands of posts point out the same bugs glitches etc.etc.
EA are too slow to fix issues with there games they concentrate far to much on Income not Outcome
I can only say the same thing will happen ere GAURANTEED (bet my life on it)
Originally posted by Deewe Originally posted by Vagrant_Zero
Originally posted by Deewe
About numbers Blizzard has spent over $200 milions for WoW till september 2008 and has over 2000 customer service reps round the world. ==> 150 million just to develop the game would be foolish
100 million while big would have been more reasonable, but if you'd asked me I would have pointed 50 maybe 70ish million and even with that budget you can make one AoC plus one Aion... and add one Everquest 2 if you are in the upper bracket.
You read the G4TV link wrong. Blizz has spent 200M on Wow SINCE 2004, ie AFTER launch, ie NOT INCLUDING development cost.
From your link: According to Activision, Blizzard has spent over $200 million on World of Warcraft since its launch.
Thanks for the highlight, was late when I posted it.
Still we can agree $150 million is really wrong and even $100 million to make the game would be quite insane. Now if you take into account how much EA paid to buy BioWare that's another story
Honestly, I fully believe that TOR will end up costing well over 100M by the time it's launched. And that really isn't alot of money. Just look at Dragon Age for example, not counting ANY DLCs or CEs (expensive Collector's Editions), the game has sold over 3 Million copies to date. 3M x $40 (rough estimate on what EA/Bio would make on a box sale) = 120M.
120M from Dragon Age alone, again not counting any DLCs or CEs, or even the new expansion pack Awakening.
Or if you'd like, if AION/War/AoC can all sell over 1Million boxes, I think it's perfectly safe and rational to believe a BIOWARE developed game on the STAR WARS IP will sell considerably more than then.
I think we can ALL agree on that.
Personally, I expect TOR to sell at a minimum of 2M boxes, and at least retain 1M subs. Guess we'll find out in a year.
Kewl, they are spending all that loverly cash on a big fat shiny for little ol' me? This is my first impulsive thought on reading the potential budget for this game. Maybe the glass is half full.
Second thoughts are, it is Bioware making the game and they have an untarnished rep.
Thirdly, it is Star Wars set in the Old Republic and that so gets my freak on.
All the above get me excited for this game and if it fails to deliver, I lose nothing but the box price. The power is always with the gamers on this score and I have plenty of other mmorpgs to hop about on if it fails.
But the OP is about the model for mmorpg development this represents and its potential repercussions for the mmorpg market as a whole. As such, it is a cool article and is looking at this from a wider perspective.
But using sparkly-eye Jedi technique, I detect the true pulse that beats under this post and its complementing replies: a lot of the old-school sandboxers are still holding out for that "Reservoir Dogs" level-indie sandbox, as opposed to a "Troma" level-indie sandbox. They worry that this current EA model is another step towards the Avatar/Titanic level of funding syndrome. And actually, the movie industry is probably the best model to compare the mmorpg one to imo. And so the fears are valid. If you don't believe me, check out how big budget syndrome actually destroyed the indie-movie scene with documentaries like "Officially Rejected"; about how the so-called "indie" movie festival circuit is anything but indie any more as it's long since been hijacked by the corporations, the A-listers and glitterati, and consequently the quality of "psuedo-indie" movies on the "psuedo-indie" festival circuit is simply dead in terms of real innovation or talent or narrative maturity. So if the mmorpg market is similar in nature to the movie market, then maybe this could be bad news for the sandboxers and hence some of the negatron vibes to these posts.
My own worry is that I am one of the minority who doesn't like the "consequence" system of Dragon Age and Mass Effect, because it is a really simplistic choice between good guy, in-between guy and cheesy-emo-bad-guy. I'd rather have three choices than none, but it is still at a level of characterisation and narrative causality that I outgrew 'round about junior high-school when I got bored of those fighting fantasy books. I would like genuine anti-heroes who face terrible choices in a tragic world, like Macbeth or Cugel or Melmoth or Elric or Kris Kelvin. I ain't waiting for the next sandbox tbh, I am waiting for the next game that doesn't serve me up more of the same old teenage or tweenage narrative simplicity. I went to university, did a couple of masters and now teach English literature...I kinda wanted the games to develop with me, at least a little of the way and I know this is unreasonable and unrealistic of me lol. On this score, the glass is definitely half empty.
Nonethless, ooh shinies. I hope this game succeeds.
Sounds a little like sour grapes, if I was a game developer or CEO of a game development house… ya, I would be thinking damn what the hell do I got to spend to compete.
But as a player I can’t look at it that way, If the game comes out and I see and feel 100 to 150 million dollars in polish and a high quality gaming experience then I say right-ON EA and Bioware show the rest of those want-a-be’s what it takes.
Personally I feel as a player I’ve dished out my hard earned money time and time again only to get let down and to find that I purchased a underdeveloped piece of crap.
So can I look at a game developer with any negative light that has finally stepped up and said if we do this we do it right and 150M is what its going to take to make the best game we can instead of… this is what we can get away with……NO
If it turns out to be a flop is bug ridden or incomplete when it ships well they are fools, as they know full well what they have to do. The MMO players of today are not going to put up with half-baked games anymore.
The gaming industry is defiantly changing at a rapid pace and if that means fewer developers putting out higher quality games then I’m all for it. The “B” movie era of game development is coming to a end.
This trend has been going on for some time, big fish eats little fish and then gets big enough for the really big fish to take notice and then the really big fish eats the big fish….. or Bioware eats Pandemic and in turn get eaten by EA who also eats Mythic and all of a sudden you have the resources to take the risk of producing a 150M MMO.
How much money do you think Blizzard will spend on there next MMO?.....150M may pale in comparison.
Despite the giant flop of WAR, executives at EA still want a foothold into that giant subscription based market...
So they are still talking revenus and finances first ... how about .... gameplay first. (Rob Pardo).
Observation 2.
EA is gambling on the telling story and voice overs and long NPC speeches between the players and those NPC's... how about .... Play, Don't Tell: Players should be playing as much as possible not listen/reading (to) stories (Rob Pardo).
Obeservation 3.
Rob Pardo says that every game Blizzard makes is ... multiplayer first now, rather than single player. Because you create far more depth and replayablitiy with multi players. Just look at Xfire and which games ar being played ... endlessly.
Bioware only creates single player games in all of its history. So typically they have a lasting playing time of a few months at best.
Keeping those 3 observations in mind, I would say EA is good on its way to beat record breaking money losses of things that sure were proven in the past.
Honestly, I fully believe that TOR will end up costing well over 100M by the time it's launched. And that really isn't alot of money. Just look at Dragon Age for example, not counting ANY DLCs or CEs (expensive Collector's Editions), the game has sold over 3 Million copies to date. 3M x $40 (rough estimate on what EA/Bio would make on a box sale) = 120M.
120M from Dragon Age alone, again not counting any DLCs or CEs, or even the new expansion pack Awakening.
Or if you'd like, if AION/War/AoC can all sell over 1Million boxes, I think it's perfectly safe and rational to believe a BIOWARE developed game on the STAR WARS IP will sell considerably more than then.
I think we can ALL agree on that.
Personally, I expect TOR to sell at a minimum of 2M boxes, and at least retain 1M subs. Guess we'll find out in a year.
The sales of PC games is very - very - small compared to the sales on consoles.
Take Dragon Age on PC alone and you would hardly get 500K sales.
Not only that but single player games are OUT for an mmorpg market. Their life expectancy is very short and you don't play on line with voice overs and long NPC relationships. Because in an mmorpg, you really don't need personal NPC's and the voice overs take time/space and put you "out" of the online play (see Conan).
So on PC, TOR will not have 2M boxes at launch and - as can be seen in the past - a 30% retention rate is only for those with extreme good and prolonged multi player gaming value.
It is clear any planning above 1.4 M at launch and 600K retention after 3 months is suicide.
Typical EA. it could be their death.
And nobody would even be sad.
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
Despite the giant flop of WAR, executives at EA still want a foothold into that giant subscription based market...
So they are still talking revenus and finances first ... how about .... gameplay first. (Rob Pardo).
Observation 2.
EA is gambling on the telling story and voice overs and long NPC speeches between the players and those NPC's... how about .... Play, Don't Tell: Players should be playing as much as possible not listen/reading (to) stories (Rob Pardo).
Obeservation 3.
Rob Pardo says that every game Blizzard makes is ... multiplayer first now, rather than single player. Because you create far more depth and replayablitiy with multi players. Just look at Xfire and which games ar being played ... endlessly.
Bioware only creates single player games in all of its history. So typically they have a lasting playing time of a few months at best.
Keeping those 3 observations in mind, I would say EA is good on its way to beat record breaking money losses of things that sure were proven in the past.
1. High-up corporate stuff will ALWAYS talk about revenue and finances first no matter what the field. Look at what Bioware says and you'll fine they do talk about gameplay first. You have to consider the context and who is talking. You don't go looking at Activision corporate comments for details about the gameplay of the next Blizzard game.
2. Err, the story is part of playing, because you decide how the story unfolds. You make decisions that affect it. They can't do that if they don't actually present a story. Bioware is very, very familiar with how to incorporate story into a game.
I mean, what are you proposing here? That you someone get to make decisions about the story, but no one in the whole game ever communicates or talks? How can you make story decisions in an environment like that? Honestly, this is where Blizzard fails, because in Warcraft you are always a relatively passive element in the story telling with a fixed role that you cannot change. Blizzard doesn't really seem to grock the idea of giving the players any sort of story control. Naturally if you never give players any narative power you should avoid tossing much story at them at any one time, because it can be very boring to have your character passive or shoved around in a story you have no control over.
3. Ever heard of Neverwinter Nights? They've had multiplayer stuff before. Beyond that, they do have some people from Mythic helping.
The game will never do well or even hit 2 mil subs for the simple fact they are chasing the dragon (WOW numbers) and are trying to much to compete with WOW they are trying to outdo them, problem is stories, voice acting isnt going to cut it. When the story is over what then? Raids? Just combat?, crafting as a afterthought? They have revealed too little what other parts of the game are going to be like, which raises alarms with me, why play a game like TOR when people can just play WOW still if thats what their shooting for? When wil the industry learn just to make a game and not compete with WOW or copy it?
The game will never do well or even hit 2 mil subs for the simple fact they are chasing the dragon (WOW numbers) and are trying to much to compete with WOW they are trying to outdo them, problem is stories, voice acting isnt going to cut it. When the story is over what then? Raids? Just combat?, crafting as a afterthought? They have revealed too little what other parts of the game are going to be like, which raises alarms with me, why play a game like TOR when people can just play WOW still if thats what their shooting for? When wil the industry learn just to make a game and not compete with WOW or copy it?
I think you are overreacting. There is more than a year to go before the game is released so there's no reason to think they aren't going to be releasing a LOT more information. Heck, they've said as much. Last year they wanted to emphasize story because that is something very different about TOR compared to other MMOs. This year they will talk about the other stuff. There are 9 months more to go in this year, and at least 3 more months after that before the game is released. Like nearly all MMOs, we don't have a lot of detail a year before release. If the year ends and they haven't said anything more, then it is more appropriate to start worrying. Now it is rather silly. Might as well complain about how we know very little about Blizzard's next MMO or something.
The game will never do well or even hit 2 mil subs for the simple fact they are chasing the dragon (WOW numbers) and are trying to much to compete with WOW they are trying to outdo them, problem is stories, voice acting isnt going to cut it. When the story is over what then? Raids? Just combat?, crafting as a afterthought? They have revealed too little what other parts of the game are going to be like, which raises alarms with me, why play a game like TOR when people can just play WOW still if thats what their shooting for? When wil the industry learn just to make a game and not compete with WOW or copy it?
I think you are overreacting. There is more than a year to go before the game is released so there's no reason to think they aren't going to be releasing a LOT more information. Heck, they've said as much. Last year they wanted to emphasize story because that is something very different about TOR compared to other MMOs. This year they will talk about the other stuff. There are 9 months more to go in this year, and at least 3 more months after that before the game is released. Like nearly all MMOs, we don't have a lot of detail a year before release. If the year ends and they haven't said anything more, then it is more appropriate to start worrying. Now it is rather silly. Might as well complain about how we know very little about Blizzard's next MMO or something.
<Smiles>
Some people are able to twist anything around, firefly states that as they haven't told him yet that the certain things he looks for in this game aren;'t there or they would have told him. .. Lets try to keep logic simple and assume everything could be in the game until developers state it isn't in the game.
The 2 mil subs comes from the huge investment. Bioware is trying to make a perfect game, with the same goals as BLizzard had when they produced WoW. and that costs a lot of money. even so much money that they need a lot of subscribers to pay for their develoment costs. SO the game needs that many subscribers because they want to put anything possible intoo it.
If you'd read some more interviiews you could have told firefly that there will be endgame raids and PvP... But that there will also be ever continuing stories at max level... the game doesn't change at level 80 as Blizzards game does, it keeps continuing which also indicates that tehre should be raids before level Max. and great PvP before level max. Bioware has stated that there will be more options then we know from the traditional endgame og games like WoW, but that the traditional endgame will be there. SO its the best of 2 worlds.
And do you know why SW:ToR will feel like a great game to most current WoW players ?
Thats because people will feel at home in the game because most ingredients from previous experiences will be there... but the game will still feel very fresh compared to WoW because of the new ingredients. And give people that game experience they want. A new game has to ballance these 2 things....and thats where Bioware will succeed.
So what makes the game feel like you're playing an MMO like you know and like you expect
-UI
-Quests
-Grouping
-Dungeons
-Classdevelopment
-Crafting
So what will make the game feel fresh.
-Combat feel
-Stories
-Mob AI
-Space combat part
-Setting (Mix of the wellknown fantasy game with the wellknown SCi FI game)
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Originally posted by camp11111 Originally posted by Vagrant_Zero
Honestly, I fully believe that TOR will end up costing well over 100M by the time it's launched. And that really isn't alot of money. Just look at Dragon Age for example, not counting ANY DLCs or CEs (expensive Collector's Editions), the game has sold over 3 Million copies to date. 3M x $40 (rough estimate on what EA/Bio would make on a box sale) = 120M. 120M from Dragon Age alone, again not counting any DLCs or CEs, or even the new expansion pack Awakening. Or if you'd like, if AION/War/AoC can all sell over 1Million boxes, I think it's perfectly safe and rational to believe a BIOWARE developed game on the STAR WARS IP will sell considerably more than then. I think we can ALL agree on that. Personally, I expect TOR to sell at a minimum of 2M boxes, and at least retain 1M subs. Guess we'll find out in a year.
The sales of PC games is very - very - small compared to the sales on consoles. Take Dragon Age on PC alone and you would hardly get 500K sales. Not only that but single player games are OUT for an mmorpg market. Their life expectancy is very short and you don't play on line with voice overs and long NPC relationships. Because in an mmorpg, you really don't need personal NPC's and the voice overs take time/space and put you "out" of the online play (see Conan). So on PC, TOR will not have 2M boxes at launch and - as can be seen in the past - a 30% retention rate is only for those with extreme good and prolonged multi player gaming value. It is clear any planning above 1.4 M at launch and 600K retention after 3 months is suicide. Typical EA. it could be their death. And nobody would even be sad.
PC game sales are depressed primarily due to Piracy. Mass Effect 2 was available on torrent sites a full week before launch.
MMOs don't suffer from this problem. If Dragon Age could not be pirated and it wasn't available on any other platform you'd have seen a hell of alot more sales than 500k.
WoW seems entrenched, but why is this so? What is it about the game that makes 10million people play it today, years after its launch.
Maybe it was because Blizzard went all out. They really risked their business with it, and they had no replacement single player games ready in the wing to generate some cash in the meantime (Bioware has both Dragon Age and Mass Effect generating cash for them and giving them brandname fans).
Maybe WoW is so big because it WAS a triple A title with a huge budget nobody else so far had spend on a MMO.
I do not know how SWTOR is going to end up. Frankly there are only two MMO's I am following and that is SWTOR and TSW but I fear both might be driving so hard for the console/casual game market they might shoot themselves in the foot and pull a Cryptic (Champions Online and Star Trek Online being less then stellar). But cryptic is a cheap and cheerful company. They spend a fraction of what EA is spending, so if the game fails after a few months, they made a profit anyway.
Will SWTOR be a success? Barring horrible beta reviews, I think we can assume it will sell like hotcakes. 1 million copies sold should be no problem AoC did that or at least came close and Bioware and Star Wars have far better reps.
What I worry about is long term appeal. I finished DOA several times in a month. How long can SWTOR keep a player hooked and paying? It is not just about story. I put DOA at its highest difficulty and still breezed through it. Its combat just ain't difficult enough. I replayed for the stories and because RPG's are thin on the ground. But there are PLENTY of MMO's. Will the combat be intresting enough to hold my intrest? So far I heard little to indicate this to be true.
In fact they seemed to go out of their way to asure me that combat is easy to get into. Uh oh. That sounds like a Cryptic game. Those are simple to. And I got bored with them in the free trial/beta
So, I don't think SWTOR will have any trouble pulling in the punters unless they screw things up horribly. But will they be able to keep them? I got my doubts. I also fear EA might nicke & dime players to such a degree that few will want to bother.
But mostly, I worry for the combat. From the vid's so far, it just doesn't look intresting enough to last years.
I dont see any long term apeal to SW:TOR. Its prime will be 2-3 months past its release date. No doubt that it will sell atleast 1 million copies at release.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
Comments
Well EA 150million to make SW:TOR you know what that means right?
No matter what they will do they go aggresively for the MASS, that means it will be playble on every pc, it will be extreme themepark and fluffy so from 8 to 80years can play it.
What we also will see in SW:TOR is limited freedom involvement by EA to controll everything so players have to do what EA say.
And innovation?
Sure to make it even more playble and fast and easy then WoW.
Knowing EA swtor will maybe even downfall of mmorpgs or at least end of innovation and indys who give up even try.
Or maybe we need failor of big companys so they leave mmo industry and small companys can take over and make there innovative fresh new old/new school games that many wanne play becouse there sick of WoWs out there.
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
EA's CEO said last year that your mom will be able to play any of their new games. So don't expect anything from them which requires skill, stratergy or dedication. There will be a games in production before he released his grand vision to the world so STOR may escape the worst, but I am sure he has already asked them if Luke's mum could play it.
People forget that when a new and anticipated game comes out, tons of people in WoW go and try it. For the last several years this has almost always disappointed because the new games are CRAP (except perhaps LOTRO but that has a more specialized audience, imho). A lot of WoW players keep playing because there's nothing better. I think it is very reasonable to conclude that TOR will be better in a number of ways and at the very least just as good and refreshingly different.
TOR has:
No Holy Trinity combat system (and this doesn't mean people don't have strengths and weaknesses or roles in combat)
You always fight multiple enemies, so you feel awesome.
Full voice acting (I personally think this is a nice perk, though minor).
Quests that have choices AND consequences (this is HUGE, because it helps remove the feeling that you are grinding).
A Group System that supports the above quest system
An awesome and very, very popular genre, more so than WoW.
Will not be painful like that last Star Wars MMO (I know some love it, but washing dishes isn't why most people play games, particularly ones in an action setting).
Two sides, but both sides have good and evil (you can play a good Sith or bad Jedi).
Long beta test of over a year and 6 year Dev time (that means that a really good company like Bioware will deliver a very, very polished game something we've lacked the last 5 years or so).
Standard end-game stuff and group quests (people that think otherwise are wrong, Bioware has explicitly talked about this and how there will also be new end-game stuff that we haven't seen in an MMO)
Large open world (yes, again the people that think differently don't know what they are talking about).
A company dedicated to story, setting, and player CHOICE making an MMO. We've not had this before.
There's every reason to think this will be insanely popular. The people who wrongly think it will be awful will change their minds when people who try it out tell them otherwise (or before that when more information is released).
Personally I'd be surprised if it only has 2 million subscribers.
Also, I play WoW some still and a lot of people are kind of burned out with it but have no other good MMO options. Blizzard seems to more and more focus on gear GRIND and their expansions don't do much more than go to total grind when you get to the end-game (and that happens within a few weeks at most after an expansion). There's not a lot of replayability in WoW anymore. Even with an expansion coming out later this year, I think the time will be ripe next year to steal away a lot of WoW players. Even grabbing 10% of the WoW playerbase would go more than halfway towards meeting TOR's sub goal.
Beyond that I think the MMO community is hungry for something new and well made. TOR should deliver on both fronts and do very well because of it.
But then again : it is very obvious - even for staunch WoW fans- Blizzard is gradually " letting go " of the WoW -franchise. The mere fact a lead developer was specualting on it utilizing a f2p model in the future was indication of that. But we know zilch about their next MMO on which a large number of developers have been working for a long time now .
I also disagree with folks citing past successes of Bioware with regard to RPG's to use as an argument to assume SW:TOR will succeed . We all know - or should know - an MMO is not the same as a very linear ( due to its nature ) RPG . Bioware has been great at " storytelling" but there is no way to incorporate that - efficiently - in a persistant world which is the very basis of any MMO .SW:TOR will require a sandbox environment and that is something Bioware hasn't done yet ( unless they plan on doing everything instanced in which case it's hardly an MMO and more than likely won't succeed ). I even find the "boxed in" environments annoying in their RPG's occasionally , as opposed to Bethesda titles which at least give you the feeling of a sandbox game .
Well, I'd think the fact that they have to pay a slew of actors for voice-work (and a lot more of it than in a single RPG) would account for another couple of million, and also, your figures aren't adjusted for inflation. Even 5 years makes a bit of a difference to the value of a dollar. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Bioware are going to have a massive ad campaign (and they will), and that they've allocated x% of box-sales revenue to pay for that. They only get a percentage of the box-price back anyway so it makes sense to allow ad/marketing spend to cancel box revenue out to a certain extent (unless thay do sell millions of boxes).
Blizz did not start with 2000 CSRs, and neither will Bioware/EA/LA, they'll start at launch with a core team and expand as needed. That's just good business sense. Remember, the game is far from being live - the 25-man dev/testing team they have now is all they need - at the moment.
We can't say anything about the foolishness or otherwise of such a big investment until we see, and play, the final product.
We can speculate all we want, but I'd lay money none of us will hit the nail on the head as regards the financial success or otherwise of the game.
1. Bioware has ALWAYS made good games. There simply aren't exceptions. That's pretty dang impressive and a sign to think they can handle making a good game even if there's a bit of a genre change (especially if they are bringing their big talents to that new genre, in this case story-telling with player choice). Not saying you can be 100% certain, but there's good reason to be optimisitic, especially since they are not rushing anything out.
2. I disagree with this assertion very strongly on many levels.
First, while certain basic events in Bioware RPGs are "linear" and the same, that doesn't mean the story itself is the same or linear. Take BG2 as an example. Irenicus is after you whether you are good or evil (or neutral). He's a powerful force that you necessarily must confront because he gives you no option. However, the manner in which you confront him can vary quite a lot. You can use and abuse everyone you run into, kill indescriminately; you can help those you run into even if it isn't easy; or a number of other things. Yes, the chapters of the game are the same for every character and there is a certain degree of linearity, but in an ethical sense at the very least it isn't linear at all and that's the meat and potatoes of many good stories. Giving choices that MATTER is a big deal in the MMO world.
Secondly, most MMOs are ridiculously linear. You can choose what quest you pick up and you either do it or don't. You have no choice how you do it. You start with low-level ones and work your way up. There's little to no anime to the world.
Thirdly, the idea that Sandbox MMOs somehow better convey a story is flat-out wrong. Sandboxes generally provide pretty poor natural antagonists that aren't very proactive. There are no big figures pushing the story forward, no big plot arcs, etc. Yes, other players doing stuff isn't anything to sneeze at, but that's NOT story 99% of the time.
Fourthly, given my above points, the idea that they can't tell a story or have strong story themes in an MMO is rather silly. At a minimum level, take a game like WoW. Take quest sequences and put them all together into big quests. Now provide ethical and other choices along the way on how you deal with certain revelations during the quest. Then make sure those choices have consequences during the questline. If you want to be more ambitious, as Bioware is, make sure there are consequences AFTER that quest is over. I think you are operating under the false assumption that story has to have global implications otherwise it isn't story. That's hardly the truth. Your choices are just as meaningful if they only have local implications, even if those implications are so localized they only affect YOU (or you and the people adventuring with you).
Fifth, I'd also like to add I think there is room in TOR to have some larger implications for some player actions. I think some of the end-game will be story-based in some manner. You can do this a number of ways with each player contributing a little to the end result, some PvP/PvE mixes, and other things. That's my guess anyhow, but we'll have to wait and see what they come up with. I'm not going to pretend they are limited by my imagination.
3. Well, for what it is worth, they are going to have large and expansive worlds as they've said several times. Ones that have massive sections with no instancing and you can run into other players (I believe a Dev said 90% of the game was like that).
I don't think they'll maintain those number. Sure Bioware is going to sell many boxes. But if this game doesn't shine like the brightest star in the universe, they're going to drop subs after the first 30 days just like every other game that has come along since WoW. The hype alone is going to kill the game. *cough* Aion.
Saying it will do well simply because it's Bioware doesn't cut it with some people. I think Bioware games are boring personally. There were a few I thought were good, sure. I loved KOTOR, BG and Jade Empire. But the thing that bugs me about them is they rehash the same game over and over. The only thing that really changes is cosmetics and names. They've really shown me nothing that proves they can pull of a whole different genre. They're a one trick pony to me so far.
Now I'm not saying I hope it bombs. I do love Star Wars and hope we get a good game out of it. But after buying other "sure things" such as WAR and AOC, I am skepitical. Not just with Bioware either. It's the first time since '97 that I am excited for no announced mmo at all. They keep going down the shitter with every new one that comes out.
Thanks for the highlight, was late when I posted it.
Still we can agree $150 million is really wrong and even $100 million to make the game would be quite insane. Now if you take into account how much EA paid to buy BioWare that's another story
They will get 1 million sales no doubt! If star Trek, and AOC can do it, you better believe that SWTOR will. Im nto sure i agree with the hypothesis that was laid out in this article, but overall i dont believe that SWTOR will have a problem with numbers unless in teh leveling process, things become too repetative, or it lacks the star wars luster!
Eh, those other games didn't shine at all. They dropped subs after 30 days because they were awful AND rushed. We can be certain given a 6 year dev time that TOR is not rushed, and I doubt it is going to be a bad game either.
And hype killed Aion because it is a grindfest that advertises flying when you don't actually get to fly that much. Same sort of hype that results in dropped subs -- bad games with hype fail, just like bad games drop subs after the first month. It just so happens we've had several years with pretty much only bad games coming out in the MMO genre.
i agree i think TOR is going to be a revolution in MMOs i am so excited!
I actually don't give a rats arse about how much they spend on it.
I am a gamer, I love games and all i can hope for is that it will be a great one that will 'love me long time' .... who cares how much money they throw at it
To repeat myself, i hope as there is no way of telling yet, despite all the "knowledgeable" people here!
Has I posted before this might be the next BIG thing but alas EA are very poor in technical issues look at the thousands of posts on the Battlefield series forums (Fps) the login server is always down patches take far to long to mature when thousands of posts point out the same bugs glitches etc.etc.
EA are too slow to fix issues with there games they concentrate far to much on Income not Outcome
I can only say the same thing will happen ere GAURANTEED (bet my life on it)
You read the G4TV link wrong. Blizz has spent 200M on Wow SINCE 2004, ie AFTER launch, ie NOT INCLUDING development cost.
From your link: According to Activision, Blizzard has spent over $200 million on World of Warcraft since its launch.
Thanks for the highlight, was late when I posted it.
Still we can agree $150 million is really wrong and even $100 million to make the game would be quite insane. Now if you take into account how much EA paid to buy BioWare that's another story
Honestly, I fully believe that TOR will end up costing well over 100M by the time it's launched. And that really isn't alot of money. Just look at Dragon Age for example, not counting ANY DLCs or CEs (expensive Collector's Editions), the game has sold over 3 Million copies to date. 3M x $40 (rough estimate on what EA/Bio would make on a box sale) = 120M.
120M from Dragon Age alone, again not counting any DLCs or CEs, or even the new expansion pack Awakening.
Or if you'd like, if AION/War/AoC can all sell over 1Million boxes, I think it's perfectly safe and rational to believe a BIOWARE developed game on the STAR WARS IP will sell considerably more than then.
I think we can ALL agree on that.
Personally, I expect TOR to sell at a minimum of 2M boxes, and at least retain 1M subs. Guess we'll find out in a year.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
Kewl, they are spending all that loverly cash on a big fat shiny for little ol' me? This is my first impulsive thought on reading the potential budget for this game. Maybe the glass is half full.
Second thoughts are, it is Bioware making the game and they have an untarnished rep.
Thirdly, it is Star Wars set in the Old Republic and that so gets my freak on.
All the above get me excited for this game and if it fails to deliver, I lose nothing but the box price. The power is always with the gamers on this score and I have plenty of other mmorpgs to hop about on if it fails.
But the OP is about the model for mmorpg development this represents and its potential repercussions for the mmorpg market as a whole. As such, it is a cool article and is looking at this from a wider perspective.
But using sparkly-eye Jedi technique, I detect the true pulse that beats under this post and its complementing replies: a lot of the old-school sandboxers are still holding out for that "Reservoir Dogs" level-indie sandbox, as opposed to a "Troma" level-indie sandbox. They worry that this current EA model is another step towards the Avatar/Titanic level of funding syndrome. And actually, the movie industry is probably the best model to compare the mmorpg one to imo. And so the fears are valid. If you don't believe me, check out how big budget syndrome actually destroyed the indie-movie scene with documentaries like "Officially Rejected"; about how the so-called "indie" movie festival circuit is anything but indie any more as it's long since been hijacked by the corporations, the A-listers and glitterati, and consequently the quality of "psuedo-indie" movies on the "psuedo-indie" festival circuit is simply dead in terms of real innovation or talent or narrative maturity. So if the mmorpg market is similar in nature to the movie market, then maybe this could be bad news for the sandboxers and hence some of the negatron vibes to these posts.
My own worry is that I am one of the minority who doesn't like the "consequence" system of Dragon Age and Mass Effect, because it is a really simplistic choice between good guy, in-between guy and cheesy-emo-bad-guy. I'd rather have three choices than none, but it is still at a level of characterisation and narrative causality that I outgrew 'round about junior high-school when I got bored of those fighting fantasy books. I would like genuine anti-heroes who face terrible choices in a tragic world, like Macbeth or Cugel or Melmoth or Elric or Kris Kelvin. I ain't waiting for the next sandbox tbh, I am waiting for the next game that doesn't serve me up more of the same old teenage or tweenage narrative simplicity. I went to university, did a couple of masters and now teach English literature...I kinda wanted the games to develop with me, at least a little of the way and I know this is unreasonable and unrealistic of me lol. On this score, the glass is definitely half empty.
Nonethless, ooh shinies. I hope this game succeeds.
Regards
Melmoth
ed. couple 'o typos.
Sounds a little like sour grapes, if I was a game developer or CEO of a game development house… ya, I would be thinking damn what the hell do I got to spend to compete.
But as a player I can’t look at it that way, If the game comes out and I see and feel 100 to 150 million dollars in polish and a high quality gaming experience then I say right-ON EA and Bioware show the rest of those want-a-be’s what it takes.
Personally I feel as a player I’ve dished out my hard earned money time and time again only to get let down and to find that I purchased a underdeveloped piece of crap.
So can I look at a game developer with any negative light that has finally stepped up and said if we do this we do it right and 150M is what its going to take to make the best game we can instead of… this is what we can get away with……NO
If it turns out to be a flop is bug ridden or incomplete when it ships well they are fools, as they know full well what they have to do. The MMO players of today are not going to put up with half-baked games anymore.
The gaming industry is defiantly changing at a rapid pace and if that means fewer developers putting out higher quality games then I’m all for it. The “B” movie era of game development is coming to a end.
This trend has been going on for some time, big fish eats little fish and then gets big enough for the really big fish to take notice and then the really big fish eats the big fish….. or Bioware eats Pandemic and in turn get eaten by EA who also eats Mythic and all of a sudden you have the resources to take the risk of producing a 150M MMO.
How much money do you think Blizzard will spend on there next MMO?.....150M may pale in comparison.
"Laid back, not so serious, no drama".
All about the fun!"
www.oldtimersguild.com
>> Open to the Public! And Recruiting <<
3 Things that strike me.
Observation 1.
Despite the giant flop of WAR, executives at EA still want a foothold into that giant subscription based market...
So they are still talking revenus and finances first ... how about .... gameplay first. (Rob Pardo).
Observation 2.
EA is gambling on the telling story and voice overs and long NPC speeches between the players and those NPC's... how about .... Play, Don't Tell: Players should be playing as much as possible not listen/reading (to) stories (Rob Pardo).
Obeservation 3.
Rob Pardo says that every game Blizzard makes is ... multiplayer first now, rather than single player. Because you create far more depth and replayablitiy with multi players. Just look at Xfire and which games ar being played ... endlessly.
Bioware only creates single player games in all of its history. So typically they have a lasting playing time of a few months at best.
Keeping those 3 observations in mind, I would say EA is good on its way to beat record breaking money losses of things that sure were proven in the past.
Let's see if Rob Pardo was right again.
I think he is.
http://www.wow.com/2010/03/12/rob-pardo-speaks-about-blizzard-game-design/
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
The sales of PC games is very - very - small compared to the sales on consoles.
Take Dragon Age on PC alone and you would hardly get 500K sales.
Not only that but single player games are OUT for an mmorpg market. Their life expectancy is very short and you don't play on line with voice overs and long NPC relationships. Because in an mmorpg, you really don't need personal NPC's and the voice overs take time/space and put you "out" of the online play (see Conan).
So on PC, TOR will not have 2M boxes at launch and - as can be seen in the past - a 30% retention rate is only for those with extreme good and prolonged multi player gaming value.
It is clear any planning above 1.4 M at launch and 600K retention after 3 months is suicide.
Typical EA. it could be their death.
And nobody would even be sad.
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
1. High-up corporate stuff will ALWAYS talk about revenue and finances first no matter what the field. Look at what Bioware says and you'll fine they do talk about gameplay first. You have to consider the context and who is talking. You don't go looking at Activision corporate comments for details about the gameplay of the next Blizzard game.
2. Err, the story is part of playing, because you decide how the story unfolds. You make decisions that affect it. They can't do that if they don't actually present a story. Bioware is very, very familiar with how to incorporate story into a game.
I mean, what are you proposing here? That you someone get to make decisions about the story, but no one in the whole game ever communicates or talks? How can you make story decisions in an environment like that? Honestly, this is where Blizzard fails, because in Warcraft you are always a relatively passive element in the story telling with a fixed role that you cannot change. Blizzard doesn't really seem to grock the idea of giving the players any sort of story control. Naturally if you never give players any narative power you should avoid tossing much story at them at any one time, because it can be very boring to have your character passive or shoved around in a story you have no control over.
3. Ever heard of Neverwinter Nights? They've had multiplayer stuff before. Beyond that, they do have some people from Mythic helping.
The game will never do well or even hit 2 mil subs for the simple fact they are chasing the dragon (WOW numbers) and are trying to much to compete with WOW they are trying to outdo them, problem is stories, voice acting isnt going to cut it. When the story is over what then? Raids? Just combat?, crafting as a afterthought? They have revealed too little what other parts of the game are going to be like, which raises alarms with me, why play a game like TOR when people can just play WOW still if thats what their shooting for? When wil the industry learn just to make a game and not compete with WOW or copy it?
I think you are overreacting. There is more than a year to go before the game is released so there's no reason to think they aren't going to be releasing a LOT more information. Heck, they've said as much. Last year they wanted to emphasize story because that is something very different about TOR compared to other MMOs. This year they will talk about the other stuff. There are 9 months more to go in this year, and at least 3 more months after that before the game is released. Like nearly all MMOs, we don't have a lot of detail a year before release. If the year ends and they haven't said anything more, then it is more appropriate to start worrying. Now it is rather silly. Might as well complain about how we know very little about Blizzard's next MMO or something.
<Smiles>
Some people are able to twist anything around, firefly states that as they haven't told him yet that the certain things he looks for in this game aren;'t there or they would have told him. .. Lets try to keep logic simple and assume everything could be in the game until developers state it isn't in the game.
The 2 mil subs comes from the huge investment. Bioware is trying to make a perfect game, with the same goals as BLizzard had when they produced WoW. and that costs a lot of money. even so much money that they need a lot of subscribers to pay for their develoment costs. SO the game needs that many subscribers because they want to put anything possible intoo it.
If you'd read some more interviiews you could have told firefly that there will be endgame raids and PvP... But that there will also be ever continuing stories at max level... the game doesn't change at level 80 as Blizzards game does, it keeps continuing which also indicates that tehre should be raids before level Max. and great PvP before level max. Bioware has stated that there will be more options then we know from the traditional endgame og games like WoW, but that the traditional endgame will be there. SO its the best of 2 worlds.
And do you know why SW:ToR will feel like a great game to most current WoW players ?
Thats because people will feel at home in the game because most ingredients from previous experiences will be there... but the game will still feel very fresh compared to WoW because of the new ingredients. And give people that game experience they want. A new game has to ballance these 2 things....and thats where Bioware will succeed.
So what makes the game feel like you're playing an MMO like you know and like you expect
-UI
-Quests
-Grouping
-Dungeons
-Classdevelopment
-Crafting
So what will make the game feel fresh.
-Combat feel
-Stories
-Mob AI
-Space combat part
-Setting (Mix of the wellknown fantasy game with the wellknown SCi FI game)
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Take Dragon Age on PC alone and you would hardly get 500K sales.
Not only that but single player games are OUT for an mmorpg market. Their life expectancy is very short and you don't play on line with voice overs and long NPC relationships. Because in an mmorpg, you really don't need personal NPC's and the voice overs take time/space and put you "out" of the online play (see Conan).
So on PC, TOR will not have 2M boxes at launch and - as can be seen in the past - a 30% retention rate is only for those with extreme good and prolonged multi player gaming value.
It is clear any planning above 1.4 M at launch and 600K retention after 3 months is suicide.
Typical EA. it could be their death.
And nobody would even be sad.
PC game sales are depressed primarily due to Piracy. Mass Effect 2 was available on torrent sites a full week before launch.
MMOs don't suffer from this problem. If Dragon Age could not be pirated and it wasn't available on any other platform you'd have seen a hell of alot more sales than 500k.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
To win big, you need to gamble big.
WoW seems entrenched, but why is this so? What is it about the game that makes 10million people play it today, years after its launch.
Maybe it was because Blizzard went all out. They really risked their business with it, and they had no replacement single player games ready in the wing to generate some cash in the meantime (Bioware has both Dragon Age and Mass Effect generating cash for them and giving them brandname fans).
Maybe WoW is so big because it WAS a triple A title with a huge budget nobody else so far had spend on a MMO.
I do not know how SWTOR is going to end up. Frankly there are only two MMO's I am following and that is SWTOR and TSW but I fear both might be driving so hard for the console/casual game market they might shoot themselves in the foot and pull a Cryptic (Champions Online and Star Trek Online being less then stellar). But cryptic is a cheap and cheerful company. They spend a fraction of what EA is spending, so if the game fails after a few months, they made a profit anyway.
Will SWTOR be a success? Barring horrible beta reviews, I think we can assume it will sell like hotcakes. 1 million copies sold should be no problem AoC did that or at least came close and Bioware and Star Wars have far better reps.
What I worry about is long term appeal. I finished DOA several times in a month. How long can SWTOR keep a player hooked and paying? It is not just about story. I put DOA at its highest difficulty and still breezed through it. Its combat just ain't difficult enough. I replayed for the stories and because RPG's are thin on the ground. But there are PLENTY of MMO's. Will the combat be intresting enough to hold my intrest? So far I heard little to indicate this to be true.
In fact they seemed to go out of their way to asure me that combat is easy to get into. Uh oh. That sounds like a Cryptic game. Those are simple to. And I got bored with them in the free trial/beta
So, I don't think SWTOR will have any trouble pulling in the punters unless they screw things up horribly. But will they be able to keep them? I got my doubts. I also fear EA might nicke & dime players to such a degree that few will want to bother.
But mostly, I worry for the combat. From the vid's so far, it just doesn't look intresting enough to last years.
I dont see any long term apeal to SW:TOR. Its prime will be 2-3 months past its release date. No doubt that it will sell atleast 1 million copies at release.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI