I don't think you understand the implications of "rapid scalability" these days. It's not just the ability to scale up, but to scale down as well.....and to even deal with rapid fluctuations in demand. There are pretty robust solutions for all those sorts of things. In most online services that deal with large volumes of use, these days the "servers" aren't actualy servers at all...they are just logical labels that entirely abstract the end user or the external adverstisement of services from the physical hardware doing the work.
If you set it up properly, these days you can have a server that supports 10,000 concurrent users, 15 minutes later supports 100,000 and 15 minutes after that goes back to supporting only 10,000. Depending on the hosting model you use...you can even only pay for the amount of hardware resources that you are using at any given minute....and not pay for them the next minute if they aren't needed. That's one of the big attractions of the Cloud Services hosting models.
The real bottle-neck would be on the client side...and the number of character objects crammed into one area. But MMO's do even have techniques to address those sorts of issues if they want to do so. Things like the dynamic layering that LOTRO uses...can be used to address client side bottle-necks. No idea if TOR decided to impliment anything like that.....but it's certainly something that can be done.
No I'm not a server tech, so no I do not understand, but you seem to be assuming you know what architecture they're using. Who's to say they're not cutting costs by using outdated architecture as an example?
It would seem to me they'd have no need to scale their launch back (cap it) if they're using the technology you're describing.
Using out-dated tech would actualy end up costing them more (not in lost sales...meaning pound for pound it's actualy alot more expensive to run). Only reason to use something like that would be if thier software wasn't archetected to handle that sort of infastructure. I suppose that's remotely possible given how long TOR has been in development....but I'd be pretty shocked if that were the case. Especialy given the amount of resources poured into building TOR.
It's far more likely this is marketing driven. Although you are correct, that I am making some assumptions.....I don't really know for sure.
Using out-dated tech would actualy end up costing them more (not in lost sales...meaning pound for pound it's actualy alot more expensive to run). Only reason to use something like that would be if thier software wasn't archetected to handle that sort of infastructure. I suppose that's remotely possible given how long TOR has been in development....but I'd be pretty shocked if that were the case. Especialy given the amount of resources poured into building TOR.
It's far more likely this is marketing driven. Although you are correct, that I am making some assumptions.....I don't really know for sure.
Oh I'm sure it's marketing driven, I wouldn't say otherwise, though I think trying to have a smooth launch is part of that marketing. It's become a milestone of sorts many try and reach in this MMo climate.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
i would be surprised gw1 was insanelly popular when they started dev on this it was what 3-4 years ago lol!
What i got from Mel's response was it really depends on whether the infrastructure could work with the technology. Who's to really say whether that's the case or not? GW1 is really a moot point in this discussion.
Again if they're using scalable infrasctructure as pointed out above, why the need for a cap at all or limited global release? Something about that just doesn't add up.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
I see a great marketing opportunity, purchase about 10 copies, bet that the game sells out, then list them on ebay for double or more.
Seems to make sense, one of the reasons I don't want to start at launch is to avoid the server overloads and queues that most MMO's have so this is going to be a good thing.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
While I am sure this is a marketing move, I wouldn't exclude the objective of at least trying a good launch, because they have excluded alot of countries(and actually annoyed alot of people). These are countries with decent or good mmo markets, that have good to very good internet connections. So that good launch objective might actually exist.
Do you guys imagine anyone in a investors meeting telling them "we are going to cap the sales, to ensure a smooth launch". I don't. I bet the investors would say, screw the launch, it's not that important, we will solve it in a week, it's happened all the time, players can live through it. We want the bloody sales!!!!
Do you guys imagine anyone in a investors meeting telling them "we are going to cap the sales, to ensure a smooth launch". I don't. I bet the investors would say, screw the launch, it's not that important, we will solve it in a week, it's happened all the time, players can live through it. We want the bloody sales!!!!
Can you imagine during the same meeting a plan to have a smooth launch to use as future advertising and positive word of mouth? I can...
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
Oh no! The evil corporation is out to get me! We all know that evil corporations never ever do anything that would be beneficial to the consumer.
Some people may be naive but some people on here are just pessimistic jackwagon trolls. Not everything is a conspiracy.
Have you ever sat in a marketing meeting for a product focussed company? Have you ever worked in CIO office and tried to tell the business that they need to scale back their profit forcasts because of a network/server scalability issue?
Well I've experienced both many times, and there is no "conspiracy theory" here. It is simply the way the business world works, especially when there are stockholders. Some private companies may have a little more leeway in how they approach short versus long term profits.
Don't get offended, I personally like the move. Smart.
But I'm not going to pretend otherwise why they are doing it...
That may well be why they are doing it. It does not make them "the evil corporation" that so many on here make them out to be though. It is common business practice everywhere. EA is not doing anything out of the ordinary so why make it out to be some new scheme to fool the "Sheep".
You may be referring to others comments, but I never suggested ERTS shouldn't have made that announcement. I was poking fun at those who believed they would actually limit sales, and was not poking fun at the company for using that tactic. I like the move by ERTS I think it is smart.
Just like Battlefield 3 marketing is loudly proclaiming "free online play" to cash in on the mis-perception that ATVI will be charging for online multiplayer in MW3 (ATVI will be charging for some premium features but not online play).
These type of smart marketing moves by ERTS is why I have shifted half my ATVI holding into ERTS over the last couple years. Kotick has eaten their lunch for over a decade now but I think ERTS has been scoring a lot of points last couple years...
Yeah, I was more referring to the general attitude that seems to have developed on these forums. Everything has be attacking someone or something for being "Fail" anymore. Maybe I need to just take a break from the forums for a while.
As far as investing goes, I admit that I know very little about it so I'll just keep my mouth shut when it comes to talking about it.
What is the saying? "better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and..."
While I am sure this is a marketing move, I wouldn't exclude the objective of at least trying a good launch, because they have excluded alot of countries(and actually annoyed alot of people). These are countries with decent or good mmo markets, that have good to very good internet connections. So that good launch objective might actually exist.
To be fair, the majority of posters in this thread are showing just how ignorant they are of database structure and design not to mention to basic business education.
The process is simple. EA hopes for higher retainment that is achieved with satisfied customers. Second, all businesses should always have phased rollouts for all mass software packages. EA is doing this by limiting regions from participating as well as limiting initial sales. You get a far more even use of support and hardware.
Do you guys imagine anyone in a investors meeting telling them "we are going to cap the sales, to ensure a smooth launch". I don't. I bet the investors would say, screw the launch, it's not that important, we will solve it in a week, it's happened all the time, players can live through it. We want the bloody sales!!!!
Can you imagine during the same meeting a plan to have a smooth launch to use as future advertising and positive word of mouth? I can...
Really? Maybe yes, but sounds like a weak point. "Play SWTOR, we had a smooth launch two months ago!"
While I am sure this is a marketing move, I wouldn't exclude the objective of at least trying a good launch, because they have excluded alot of countries(and actually annoyed alot of people). These are countries with decent or good mmo markets, that have good to very good internet connections. So that good launch objective might actually exist.
To be fair, the majority of posters in this thread are showing just how ignorant they are of database structure and design not to mention to basic business education.
The process is simple. EA hopes for higher retainment that is achieved with satisfied customers. Second, all businesses should always have phased rollouts for all mass software packages. EA is doing this by limiting regions from participating as well as limiting initial sales. You get a far more even use of support and hardware.
Yeah a majority in this thread seem to think it's all about box sales for EA/Bioware, which mean squat in the overall scheme of MMO development. Most decisions are going to be made in reference to retainment and longterm customer satisfaction. A smooth launch would very much be a part of that. It's become a badge of honor for those who have achieved it.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
Do you guys imagine anyone in a investors meeting telling them "we are going to cap the sales, to ensure a smooth launch". I don't. I bet the investors would say, screw the launch, it's not that important, we will solve it in a week, it's happened all the time, players can live through it. We want the bloody sales!!!!
Can you imagine during the same meeting a plan to have a smooth launch to use as future advertising and positive word of mouth? I can...
Really? Maybe yes, but sounds like a weak point. "Play SWTOR, we had a smooth launch two months ago!"
I don't know...
And in terms of an MMO,getting a bunch of Box sales means more? Keeping them is of no importance, which a smooth launch would make that more likely, yeah weak point indeed....
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
While I am sure this is a marketing move, I wouldn't exclude the objective of at least trying a good launch, because they have excluded alot of countries(and actually annoyed alot of people). These are countries with decent or good mmo markets, that have good to very good internet connections. So that good launch objective might actually exist.
To be fair, the majority of posters in this thread are showing just how ignorant they are of database structure and design not to mention to basic business education.
The process is simple. EA hopes for higher retainment that is achieved with satisfied customers. Second, all businesses should always have phased rollouts for all mass software packages. EA is doing this by limiting regions from participating as well as limiting initial sales. You get a far more even use of support and hardware.
Yeah a majority in this thread seem to think it's all about box sales for EA/Bioware, which mean squat in the overall scheme of MMO development. Most decisions are going to be made in reference to retainment and longterm customer satisfaction. A smooth launch would very much be a part of that. It's become a badge of honor for those who have achieved it.
Box sales have traditionally been a huge revenue maker for MMO's so box sales do in fact mean something to MMO's. WoW may have made everyone think that the big money is in subs, but until WoW, and after for most MMO's, the bigger money was in initial box sales. Subs keep a game going after launch and good subs keep a game updated and developed, but there is a reason that even WoW sales expansions as "box" sales.
While I am sure this is a marketing move, I wouldn't exclude the objective of at least trying a good launch, because they have excluded alot of countries(and actually annoyed alot of people). These are countries with decent or good mmo markets, that have good to very good internet connections. So that good launch objective might actually exist.
To be fair, the majority of posters in this thread are showing just how ignorant they are of database structure and design not to mention to basic business education.
The process is simple. EA hopes for higher retainment that is achieved with satisfied customers. Second, all businesses should always have phased rollouts for all mass software packages. EA is doing this by limiting regions from participating as well as limiting initial sales. You get a far more even use of support and hardware.
Yeah a majority in this thread seem to think it's all about box sales for EA/Bioware, which mean squat in the overall scheme of MMO development. Most decisions are going to be made in reference to retainment and longterm customer satisfaction. A smooth launch would very much be a part of that. It's become a badge of honor for those who have achieved it.
Box sales have traditionally been a huge revenue maker for MMO's so box sales do in fact mean something to MMO's. WoW may have made everyone think that the big money is in subs, but until WoW, and after for most MMO's, the bigger money was in initial box sales. Subs keep a game going after launch and good subs keep a game updated and developed, but there is a reason that even WoW sales expansions as "box" sales.
Box sales mean one thing a quick return on investment, after that it's about keeping as many subs as possible. Box sales help for sure, I didn't say they don't but they aren't the end-all be-all of an MMO in terms of revenue and success.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
Do you guys imagine anyone in a investors meeting telling them "we are going to cap the sales, to ensure a smooth launch". I don't. I bet the investors would say, screw the launch, it's not that important, we will solve it in a week, it's happened all the time, players can live through it. We want the bloody sales!!!!
Can you imagine during the same meeting a plan to have a smooth launch to use as future advertising and positive word of mouth? I can...
Really? Maybe yes, but sounds like a weak point. "Play SWTOR, we had a smooth launch two months ago!"
I don't know...
And in terms of an MMO,getting a bunch of Box sales means more? Keeping them is of no importance, which a smooth launch would make that more likely, yeah weak point indeed....
Of course it means much more. Much much more than a smooth launch. But then again... if this is a move is to activate the sales.. maybe it's too obvious since even us here are seeing that. So maybe it's legit. Maybe they do want a smooth launch. But of course, even if it's too obvious it *will* activate the sales.
I bet they do it to increase the sales, which would mean they have less sales than expected.
Of course maybe i'm wrong, just pure especulation.
While I am sure this is a marketing move, I wouldn't exclude the objective of at least trying a good launch, because they have excluded alot of countries(and actually annoyed alot of people). These are countries with decent or good mmo markets, that have good to very good internet connections. So that good launch objective might actually exist.
To be fair, the majority of posters in this thread are showing just how ignorant they are of database structure and design not to mention to basic business education.
The process is simple. EA hopes for higher retainment that is achieved with satisfied customers. Second, all businesses should always have phased rollouts for all mass software packages. EA is doing this by limiting regions from participating as well as limiting initial sales. You get a far more even use of support and hardware.
Yeah a majority in this thread seem to think it's all about box sales for EA/Bioware, which mean squat in the overall scheme of MMO development. Most decisions are going to be made in reference to retainment and longterm customer satisfaction. A smooth launch would very much be a part of that. It's become a badge of honor for those who have achieved it.
Box sales have traditionally been a huge revenue maker for MMO's so box sales do in fact mean something to MMO's. WoW may have made everyone think that the big money is in subs, but until WoW, and after for most MMO's, the bigger money was in initial box sales. Subs keep a game going after launch and good subs keep a game updated and developed, but there is a reason that even WoW sales expansions as "box" sales.
Box sales mean one thing a quick return on investment, after that it's about keeping as many subs as possible. Box sales help for sure, I didn't say they don't but they aren't the end-all be-all of an MMO in terms of revenue and success.
To back you up, Age of Conan sold 1.5 million boxes. Look at what happened there. Box sales are helpful in recovering initial investment but not long term success.
While I am sure this is a marketing move, I wouldn't exclude the objective of at least trying a good launch, because they have excluded alot of countries(and actually annoyed alot of people). These are countries with decent or good mmo markets, that have good to very good internet connections. So that good launch objective might actually exist.
To be fair, the majority of posters in this thread are showing just how ignorant they are of database structure and design not to mention to basic business education.
The process is simple. EA hopes for higher retainment that is achieved with satisfied customers. Second, all businesses should always have phased rollouts for all mass software packages. EA is doing this by limiting regions from participating as well as limiting initial sales. You get a far more even use of support and hardware.
Yeah a majority in this thread seem to think it's all about box sales for EA/Bioware, which mean squat in the overall scheme of MMO development. Most decisions are going to be made in reference to retainment and longterm customer satisfaction. A smooth launch would very much be a part of that. It's become a badge of honor for those who have achieved it.
Box sales have traditionally been a huge revenue maker for MMO's so box sales do in fact mean something to MMO's. WoW may have made everyone think that the big money is in subs, but until WoW, and after for most MMO's, the bigger money was in initial box sales. Subs keep a game going after launch and good subs keep a game updated and developed, but there is a reason that even WoW sales expansions as "box" sales.
Box sales mean one thing a quick return on investment, after that it's about keeping as many subs as possible. Box sales help for sure, I didn't say they don't but they aren't the end-all be-all of an MMO in terms of revenue and success.
To back you up, Age of Conan sold 1.5 million boxes. Look at what happened there. Box sales are helpful in recovering initial investment but not long term success.
And in terms of an MMO,getting a bunch of Box sales means more? Keeping them is of no importance, which a smooth launch would make that more likely, yeah weak point indeed....
Of course it means much more. Much much more than a smooth launch. But then again... if this is a move is to activate the sales.. maybe it's too obvious since even us here are seeing that. So maybe it's legit. Maybe they do want a smooth launch. But of course, even if it's too obvious it *will* activate the sales.
I bet they do it to increase the sales, which would mean they have less sales than expected.
Of course maybe i'm wrong, just pure especulation.
I think you missed the point there, I wasn't comparing box sales to a smooth launch, I was comparing them to what a smooth launch leads to, happy customers. In terms of revenue BOX sales bring in money, there's no question there, so financially speaking yes they mean more than a solid launch. That's where such importance ends though, and longevity becomes the key issue for the business. The happier your customers are the better off you are as a business. A bunch of box sales that lead to mass cancellations due to problems, is basically getting you nowhere fast in terms of running an MMO service.
Even if it's not their reasoning for all of this, it should be, that's all I am saying here.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
Oh no! The evil corporation is out to get me! We all know that evil corporations never ever do anything that would be beneficial to the consumer.
Some people may be naive but some people on here are just pessimistic jackwagon trolls. Not everything is a conspiracy.
Have you ever sat in a marketing meeting for a product focussed company? Have you ever worked in CIO office and tried to tell the business that they need to scale back their profit forcasts because of a network/server scalability issue?
Well I've experienced both many times, and there is no "conspiracy theory" here. It is simply the way the business world works, especially when there are stockholders. Some private companies may have a little more leeway in how they approach short versus long term profits.
Don't get offended, I personally like the move. Smart.
But I'm not going to pretend otherwise why they are doing it...
Exactly, if this were a small startup without much prior experience at product launches or handling large scale infrastructure issues, I could maybe see something like that happening....but EA has been around the block more then a few times. Plus this far out from launch....there is no way they couldn't make adjustments to deal with those sort of demand issues. This has marketing written all over it.
I don't think they are "evil" for trying it....but I don't think people should be fooled about the tactic being used either.
Quick question for the both of you, what get rich quick scheme are they applying in not doing a global release? Again under the banner of, "we want a smooth launch"? That sure as hell didn't win them any cookies from the global audience at large.
Not doing global release, I'm assuming is because they don't want to wait to have all thier localizations done before they can start selling subscriptions to NA customers. That very likely has nothing to do with marketing but with the amount of time it takes to do localized versions for different countries/geographic regions.
Pretty standard practice is that you build the application for whatever language/region you consider "native" and then you localize it for the different regions you want to markey it to afterwards. So while they probably do have alot of the localization work done.....any changes/content made before release in the late beta stages of the product won't have had time to be localized for different regions by the launch date they set for NA. So thier options would either be delay launch for NA (and starting the clock on those subs) until all the individual localizations are done to have a global launch....or do a staggered launch bringing on each region as the localization work for it is completed.
At least that's typicaly the rationale. Definately shouldn't have anything to do with resource constraints in having too many users on at once globaly. Typicaly, resource load in one region shouldn't have very much effect on performance in a different region. This assumes that they are establishing multiple points of presence (i.e. "servers" hosted in different geographic regions) globaly to help reduce latency issues.
Oh no! The evil corporation is out to get me! We all know that evil corporations never ever do anything that would be beneficial to the consumer.
Some people may be naive but some people on here are just pessimistic jackwagon trolls. Not everything is a conspiracy.
Have you ever sat in a marketing meeting for a product focussed company? Have you ever worked in CIO office and tried to tell the business that they need to scale back their profit forcasts because of a network/server scalability issue?
Well I've experienced both many times, and there is no "conspiracy theory" here. It is simply the way the business world works, especially when there are stockholders. Some private companies may have a little more leeway in how they approach short versus long term profits.
Don't get offended, I personally like the move. Smart.
But I'm not going to pretend otherwise why they are doing it...
Exactly, if this were a small startup without much prior experience at product launches or handling large scale infrastructure issues, I could maybe see something like that happening....but EA has been around the block more then a few times. Plus this far out from launch....there is no way they couldn't make adjustments to deal with those sort of demand issues. This has marketing written all over it.
I don't think they are "evil" for trying it....but I don't think people should be fooled about the tactic being used either.
Quick question for the both of you, what get rich quick scheme are they applying in not doing a global release? Again under the banner of, "we want a smooth launch"? That sure as hell didn't win them any cookies from the global audience at large.
Not doing global release, I'm assuming is because they don't want to wait to have all thier localizations done before they can start selling subscriptions to NA customers. That very likely has nothing to do with marketing but with the amount of time it takes to do localized versions for different countries/geographic regions.
Pretty standard practice is that you build the application for whatever language/region you consider "native" and then you localize it for the different regions you want to markey it to afterwards. So while they probably do have alot of the localization work done.....any changes/content made before release in the late beta stages of the product won't have had time to be localized for different regions by the launch date they set for NA. So thier options would either be delay launch for NA (and starting the clock on those subs) until all the individual localizations are done to have a global launch....or do a staggered launch bringing on each region as the localization work for it is completed.
At least that's typicaly the rationale. Definately shouldn't have anything to do with resource constraints in having too many users on at once globaly. Typicaly, resource load in one region shouldn't have very much effect on performance in a different region. This assumes that they are establishing multiple points of presence (i.e. "servers" hosted in different geographic regions) globaly to help reduce latency issues.
Thing is localization doesn't make sence to alot of the countries excluded, since I don't think they will get localized servers. I am talking about excluded countries that are part of Europe and even the EU.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
And in terms of an MMO,getting a bunch of Box sales means more? Keeping them is of no importance, which a smooth launch would make that more likely, yeah weak point indeed....
Of course it means much more. Much much more than a smooth launch. But then again... if this is a move is to activate the sales.. maybe it's too obvious since even us here are seeing that. So maybe it's legit. Maybe they do want a smooth launch. But of course, even if it's too obvious it *will* activate the sales.
I bet they do it to increase the sales, which would mean they have less sales than expected.
Of course maybe i'm wrong, just pure especulation.
I think you missed the point there, I wasn't comparing box sales to a smooth launch, I was comparing them to what a smooth launch leads to, happy customers. In terms of revenue BOX sales bring in money, there's no question there, so financially speaking yes they mean more than a solid launch. That's where such importance ends though, and longevity becomes the key issue for the business. The happier your customers are the better off you are as a business. A bunch of box sales that lead to mass cancellations due to problems, is basically getting you nowhere fast in terms of running an MMO service.
Even if it's not their reasoning for all of this, it should be, that's all I am saying here.
Look, I have absolutely no doubt that they want to deliver a smooth launch, and that it makes good business sense for them to strive for that. However, if the only way they expect to be able to achieve that is by artificial limiting sales....then they'd be far better off firing thier current Infrastructure Managers and hiring competent ones (I happen to be available for the right price ).
I'm sorry to break it to the person who made the comment about DB structure....but I don't think you are very familiar with Application Archectecture on this sort of scale. About the only thing that MIGHT need to be held in common across regions or server clusters would be account login data. Pretty much everything else could be broken up into smaller chunks and handled by individual data structures (usualy multiple ones, each presented to the app as a service) that are local to that cluster or region.
Phased launch by region, almost always have to do with localization issues.....or sometimes even issues not related to technology issues at all (business deals, licensing or permits with local distributors, vendors or sometimes even government officials).
In my expereince, launch day issues more often come down to improper time/resources aloted to QA.....or last minute coding changes to vital pieces of the application then to scaling issues.
I think alot of people would be shocked to learn how much coding work goes on right up until launch. It's not supposed to happen....but far too often it does. I've actualy seen applications launched where vital peices of code were still being written as the Ops guy was pushing the final file set upto the servers for release....and then going into the launch version of the code, completely untested. And then people wonder why stuff blows up on launch when it was working in beta
Comments
Using out-dated tech would actualy end up costing them more (not in lost sales...meaning pound for pound it's actualy alot more expensive to run). Only reason to use something like that would be if thier software wasn't archetected to handle that sort of infastructure. I suppose that's remotely possible given how long TOR has been in development....but I'd be pretty shocked if that were the case. Especialy given the amount of resources poured into building TOR.
It's far more likely this is marketing driven. Although you are correct, that I am making some assumptions.....I don't really know for sure.
i would be surprised gw1 was insanelly popular when they started dev on this it was what 3-4 years ago lol!
Oh I'm sure it's marketing driven, I wouldn't say otherwise, though I think trying to have a smooth launch is part of that marketing. It's become a milestone of sorts many try and reach in this MMo climate.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
What i got from Mel's response was it really depends on whether the infrastructure could work with the technology. Who's to really say whether that's the case or not? GW1 is really a moot point in this discussion.
Again if they're using scalable infrasctructure as pointed out above, why the need for a cap at all or limited global release? Something about that just doesn't add up.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
I see a great marketing opportunity, purchase about 10 copies, bet that the game sells out, then list them on ebay for double or more.
Seems to make sense, one of the reasons I don't want to start at launch is to avoid the server overloads and queues that most MMO's have so this is going to be a good thing.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
While I am sure this is a marketing move, I wouldn't exclude the objective of at least trying a good launch, because they have excluded alot of countries(and actually annoyed alot of people). These are countries with decent or good mmo markets, that have good to very good internet connections. So that good launch objective might actually exist.
Do you guys imagine anyone in a investors meeting telling them "we are going to cap the sales, to ensure a smooth launch". I don't. I bet the investors would say, screw the launch, it's not that important, we will solve it in a week, it's happened all the time, players can live through it. We want the bloody sales!!!!
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
Can you imagine during the same meeting a plan to have a smooth launch to use as future advertising and positive word of mouth? I can...
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
Yeah, I was more referring to the general attitude that seems to have developed on these forums. Everything has be attacking someone or something for being "Fail" anymore. Maybe I need to just take a break from the forums for a while.
As far as investing goes, I admit that I know very little about it so I'll just keep my mouth shut when it comes to talking about it.
What is the saying? "better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and..."
To be fair, the majority of posters in this thread are showing just how ignorant they are of database structure and design not to mention to basic business education.
The process is simple. EA hopes for higher retainment that is achieved with satisfied customers. Second, all businesses should always have phased rollouts for all mass software packages. EA is doing this by limiting regions from participating as well as limiting initial sales. You get a far more even use of support and hardware.
Really? Maybe yes, but sounds like a weak point. "Play SWTOR, we had a smooth launch two months ago!"
I don't know...
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
Yeah a majority in this thread seem to think it's all about box sales for EA/Bioware, which mean squat in the overall scheme of MMO development. Most decisions are going to be made in reference to retainment and longterm customer satisfaction. A smooth launch would very much be a part of that. It's become a badge of honor for those who have achieved it.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
And in terms of an MMO,getting a bunch of Box sales means more? Keeping them is of no importance, which a smooth launch would make that more likely, yeah weak point indeed....
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
Box sales have traditionally been a huge revenue maker for MMO's so box sales do in fact mean something to MMO's. WoW may have made everyone think that the big money is in subs, but until WoW, and after for most MMO's, the bigger money was in initial box sales. Subs keep a game going after launch and good subs keep a game updated and developed, but there is a reason that even WoW sales expansions as "box" sales.
Box sales mean one thing a quick return on investment, after that it's about keeping as many subs as possible. Box sales help for sure, I didn't say they don't but they aren't the end-all be-all of an MMO in terms of revenue and success.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
Of course it means much more. Much much more than a smooth launch. But then again... if this is a move is to activate the sales.. maybe it's too obvious since even us here are seeing that. So maybe it's legit. Maybe they do want a smooth launch. But of course, even if it's too obvious it *will* activate the sales.
I bet they do it to increase the sales, which would mean they have less sales than expected.
Of course maybe i'm wrong, just pure especulation.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
To back you up, Age of Conan sold 1.5 million boxes. Look at what happened there. Box sales are helpful in recovering initial investment but not long term success.
ya, its the best game out there now
I think you missed the point there, I wasn't comparing box sales to a smooth launch, I was comparing them to what a smooth launch leads to, happy customers. In terms of revenue BOX sales bring in money, there's no question there, so financially speaking yes they mean more than a solid launch. That's where such importance ends though, and longevity becomes the key issue for the business. The happier your customers are the better off you are as a business. A bunch of box sales that lead to mass cancellations due to problems, is basically getting you nowhere fast in terms of running an MMO service.
Even if it's not their reasoning for all of this, it should be, that's all I am saying here.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
Not doing global release, I'm assuming is because they don't want to wait to have all thier localizations done before they can start selling subscriptions to NA customers. That very likely has nothing to do with marketing but with the amount of time it takes to do localized versions for different countries/geographic regions.
Pretty standard practice is that you build the application for whatever language/region you consider "native" and then you localize it for the different regions you want to markey it to afterwards. So while they probably do have alot of the localization work done.....any changes/content made before release in the late beta stages of the product won't have had time to be localized for different regions by the launch date they set for NA. So thier options would either be delay launch for NA (and starting the clock on those subs) until all the individual localizations are done to have a global launch....or do a staggered launch bringing on each region as the localization work for it is completed.
At least that's typicaly the rationale. Definately shouldn't have anything to do with resource constraints in having too many users on at once globaly. Typicaly, resource load in one region shouldn't have very much effect on performance in a different region. This assumes that they are establishing multiple points of presence (i.e. "servers" hosted in different geographic regions) globaly to help reduce latency issues.
Thing is localization doesn't make sence to alot of the countries excluded, since I don't think they will get localized servers. I am talking about excluded countries that are part of Europe and even the EU.
Mythic had 120 servers and are now down to two in the USA. I don't doubt they are trying to learn from this.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
But that isn't because of a bad launch, it's because of a bad game.
Everybody says WOW had a bad launch in the US, so.. there you have it.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
Look, I have absolutely no doubt that they want to deliver a smooth launch, and that it makes good business sense for them to strive for that. However, if the only way they expect to be able to achieve that is by artificial limiting sales....then they'd be far better off firing thier current Infrastructure Managers and hiring competent ones (I happen to be available for the right price
).
I'm sorry to break it to the person who made the comment about DB structure....but I don't think you are very familiar with Application Archectecture on this sort of scale. About the only thing that MIGHT need to be held in common across regions or server clusters would be account login data. Pretty much everything else could be broken up into smaller chunks and handled by individual data structures (usualy multiple ones, each presented to the app as a service) that are local to that cluster or region.
Phased launch by region, almost always have to do with localization issues.....or sometimes even issues not related to technology issues at all (business deals, licensing or permits with local distributors, vendors or sometimes even government officials).
In my expereince, launch day issues more often come down to improper time/resources aloted to QA.....or last minute coding changes to vital pieces of the application then to scaling issues.
I think alot of people would be shocked to learn how much coding work goes on right up until launch. It's not supposed to happen....but far too often it does. I've actualy seen applications launched where vital peices of code were still being written as the Ops guy was pushing the final file set upto the servers for release....and then going into the launch version of the code, completely untested. And then people wonder why stuff blows up on launch when it was working in beta
Hopefully Bioware is better then that, though.
This is true, but WOW actually had a good launch compared to many in the market at that time.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...