Why is this game considered a failure?

dirtyd77 · March 2014

Originally posted by wildscore12
And no one competent uses your definition of failure.

For the last two years they have improved the game with updates and content? CHECK

Healthy impressive revenue stream? CHECK

profitable? CHECK

Over a million customer which is top three in the field? CHECK

That does not EQUAL FAILURE TO ANYONE. Those are the facts normal people know, those are the facts normal people base their opinion on. Normal people don't try and twist the facts like you to make your ridiculous idea of how business works work.

I don't think he is calling it a failure. I think I recall seeing a few post back where he said it was a success. I think he is just arguing with your knowledge/understanding of Business/Economics.

Foomerang · March 2014

At least I bet we can all agree that this is not as cut and dry as it seems haha

marsh9799 · March 2014

Originally posted by GeezerGamer
I recall reading an interview where the EA CFO said in an off the cuff one liner, "SWTOR is profitable" with nothing to follow that statement up with. Well, OK, so he said the game is profitable and I am not going to call anyone a liar so I will assume the game is making money. I have no reason not to believe it is not making money.

There is pretty much a 100% chance he's telling the truth. A lot of people have talked about EA lying. They aren't lying. They may not be giving the complete picture, but lying would get them in a world of trouble with the SEC.

But here is what we (or maybe it's just me but I'm willing to hear out) don't know entirely.

How many hundreds of millions did BW spend on development?

We don't know, but there were several estimates of $200 million in development costs. There was another estimate that the total cost- which would have included Bioware buyout, marketing, etc.- was $500 million.

Beyond that, How much did EA spend to acquire BW?

If I remember right, it was around $850-$900 million but included some other studio that Bioware partnered with. I don't know if we know what each company was valued at in the purchase.

I believe it was referenced that Disney is getting 35% from SWTOR.

I'm pretty sure the value has not been stated. It is an after payout royalty and has been speculated to be between 30% and 35% which is probably accurate.

In the same interview where EA said the gaem was profitable, it also says SWTOR had a rocky 1st year.

How much did EA need to spend on the F2P conversion?

Not available.

After a rocky 1st year, that means 2013 was really SWTOR's 1st "profitable" year.

Not available, but at 7 months in I believe EA stated "at some point, the game will be profitable."

What is the extent of that profit....not revenue...profit?

Not available. We can make some educated guesses but nothing with much precision.

How much from the above expenses (if not more) does EA still owe shareholders for this title?

Zero. EA never owed shareholders for the title. I'm a little confused here- could you clarify?

So, just how much overhead/loss/expense what have you can one profitable year recover?

Something less than infinity :-) There's no real upper limit. I've seen investments pay for themselves 10 times over in a single year and ones that have yet to pay out after six years.

I certainly don't have all the facts, but I do find it hard to believe that this game has turned any corners beyond the 1st (They stopped the bleeding) and still has a long way to go to become a success story.

I don't know if you played the game or not or stuck with it if you did play, but they did numerous good things with the game (unfortunately after most people had moved on).

GregorMcgregor · March 2014

One word sums it up... "iceberg".

(And that's from someone that IS subbed! Why? Cus there is nothing else around with SW in it. As someone said early on, if it wasn't for SW it would be a wasteland. So much to offer, yet doesn't! So yes, it failed at it's task, to bring SW to life via a MMORPG. (imho)).

GeezerGamer · March 2014

Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by GeezerGamer

I don't know if you played the game or not or stuck with it if you did play, but they did numerous good things with the game (unfortunately after most people had moved on).

I played a little. I am more a Sci Fi fan than fantasy. Been tossing the idea of re installing it. Probably will and give it a whirl. While I play GW2 and wait to see if TESO and / or WildStar are going to be right for me.

I've been waiting with baited breath for Anarchy Online to announce the status of their now beta engine update. However, recent announcements concerning other updates to that game have left me disappointed again. So now, I am not sure what Sci Fi MMO is out there for me.

EDIT:

Also, to clarify. When will the investors who backed EA/BW for this title feel satisfied their investment paid off?

Again, It's unknown but the game cannot be called a success if all the backers lost their shits without getting their investment back.

Tygranir · March 2014

Originally posted by GeezerGamer
Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by GeezerGamer

I don't know if you played the game or not or stuck with it if you did play, but they did numerous good things with the game (unfortunately after most people had moved on).

I played a little. I am more a Sci Fi fan than fantasy. Been tossing the idea of re installing it. Probably will and give it a whirl. While I play GW2 and wait to see if TESO and / or WildStar are going to be right for me.

I've been waiting with baited breath for Anarchy Online to announce the status of their now beta engine update. However, recent announcements concerning other updates to that game have left me disappointed again. So now, I am not sure what Sci Fi MMO is out there for me.

I'd definitely say give it another try. It has come a long ways from where it was 2 years ago. Also, if you use my referral link below, you get some nifty perks (And I get a cool in game pet )

GeezerGamer · March 2014

Originally posted by wildscore12
Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by GeezerGamer
I recall reading an interview where the EA CFO said in an off the cuff one liner, "SWTOR is profitable" with nothing to follow that statement up with. Well, OK, so he said the game is profitable and I am not going to call anyone a liar so I will assume the game is making money. I have no reason not to believe it is not making money.

There is pretty much a 100% chance he's telling the truth. A lot of people have talked about EA lying. They aren't lying. They may not be giving the complete picture, but lying would get them in a world of trouble with the SEC.

But here is what we (or maybe it's just me but I'm willing to hear out) don't know entirely.

How many hundreds of millions did BW spend on development?

We don't know, but there were several estimates of $200 million in development costs. There was another estimate that the total cost- which would have included Bioware buyout, marketing, etc.- was $500 million.

Beyond that, How much did EA spend to acquire BW?

If I remember right, it was around $850-$900 million but included some other studio that Bioware partnered with. I don't know if we know what each company was valued at in the purchase.

I believe it was referenced that Disney is getting 35% from SWTOR.

I'm pretty sure the value has not been stated. It is an after payout royalty and has been speculated to be between 30% and 35% which is probably accurate.

In the same interview where EA said the gaem was profitable, it also says SWTOR had a rocky 1st year.

How much did EA need to spend on the F2P conversion?

Not available.

After a rocky 1st year, that means 2013 was really SWTOR's 1st "profitable" year.

Not available, but at 7 months in I believe EA stated "at some point, the game will be profitable."

What is the extent of that profit....not revenue...profit?

Not available. We can make some educated guesses but nothing with much precision.

How much from the above expenses (if not more) does EA still owe shareholders for this title?

Zero. EA never owed shareholders for the title. I'm a little confused here- could you clarify?

So, just how much overhead/loss/expense what have you can one profitable year recover?

Something less than infinity :-) There's no real upper limit. I've seen investments pay for themselves 10 times over in a single year and ones that have yet to pay out after six years.

I certainly don't have all the facts, but I do find it hard to believe that this game has turned any corners beyond the 1st (They stopped the bleeding) and still has a long way to go to become a success story.

I don't know if you played the game or not or stuck with it if you did play, but they did numerous good things with the game (unfortunately after most people had moved on).

Geez where did you copy/paste that garbage from? Lots of "I don't know" "not available" "if I remember right" "which is probably accurate" "we don't know"

Some how you make it sound like EA only bought BW for SWTOR? Pretty sure there was a lot more games to BW library than just SWTOR. Maybe you should read what you copy/paste next time.

LOL, you go on teh offensive for asking a question where I said I don't know.

Well, what ever, you probably don't want to face the real possibility that this game isn't the golden goose egg it was promised to be. But that doesn't mean it's not making money.

But back to the post......

You don't know either then huh?

GeezerGamer · March 2014

Originally posted by Tygranir
Originally posted by GeezerGamer
Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by GeezerGamer

I don't know if you played the game or not or stuck with it if you did play, but they did numerous good things with the game (unfortunately after most people had moved on).

I played a little. I am more a Sci Fi fan than fantasy. Been tossing the idea of re installing it. Probably will and give it a whirl. While I play GW2 and wait to see if TESO and / or WildStar are going to be right for me.

I've been waiting with baited breath for Anarchy Online to announce the status of their now beta engine update. However, recent announcements concerning other updates to that game have left me disappointed again. So now, I am not sure what Sci Fi MMO is out there for me.

I'd definitely say give it another try. It has come a long ways from where it was 2 years ago. Also, if you use my referral link below, you get some nifty perks (And I get a cool in game pet )

I'd take you up on that, but I do have an account. I'd probably just log back into my old character.

marsh9799 · March 2014

Originally posted by Tygranir

Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by Tygranir
Originally posted by Netspook
Originally posted by Tygranir
So, you don't think it was successful. That's fine. What you think doesn't change the fact that they have recouped their costs and are currently in the black with SWTOR. To me, and in concourse with the definition of the word, SWTOR is a success.

So, according to you, if I invest 100 dollar and get 101 back, that's a success.

You clearly don't know much about economics. There's no such thing as a "successful Investment" when you could easily increase the profit by investing the money on something else.

I have no idead about how MUCH they're earning on SWTOR, but then again, neither do you.

Well, they claim $139 Mil from the Cartel market for last year. They also state the stabilized subs just under 500,000. 500,000 subs at $15 a month is $90 Mil for the year. I'm sure you can do the rest yourself. And yes, any financial gain is profit. If your goal is profit, then you have achieved your goal, which denotes success. If your goal was a certain level of profit, then you would need to attain that. Only EA knows if they are gaining the success that they are currently aiming for. As we do not have that information, we need to revert to basic definitions. Companies make video games to earn money. If more money is made than is needed to develop, sustain, and progress the game, then it is successful in that endeavor. How successful is subjective.

No, they did not claim they made $139 million from the Cartel Market last year. A third party estimate they had $139 million in revenue from F2P. After they said the game stabilized at 500k, they reported that they had a 19% decrease in subscription revenue driven primarily by SWTOR.

Again, no one competent uses your definition of success. I certainly hope you don't use it for your retirement planning because it will be horrifically unsuccessful.

M'kay. So you still refuse basic definitions, which is all we have to go by with current information. You choose to see it as a failure, that's fine. The dictionary disagrees with you. I disagree with you. Nothing fruitful can be gained by further interaction with you. Have a great day.

suc·cess

s?k?ses/

1.

the accomplishment of an aim or purpose.

"the president had some success in restoring confidence"

Failure.

Originally posted by Tygranir

Originally posted by dirtyd77
Originally posted by Tygranir

Well, they claim $139 Mil from the Cartel market for last year. They also state the stabilized subs just under 500,000. 500,000 subs at $15 a month is $90 Mil for the year. I'm sure you can do the rest yourself. And yes, any financial gain is profit. If your goal is profit, then you have achieved your goal, which denotes success. If your goal was a certain level of profit, then you would need to attain that. Only EA knows if they are gaining the success that they are currently aiming for. As we do not have that information, we need to revert to basic definitions. Companies make video games to earn money. If more money is made than is needed to develop, sustain, and progress the game, then it is successful in that endeavor. How successful is subjective.

Common sense would tell you that EA is not just going for profit. Yes you are right in saying that we do not know what their goal is however we do know that they have a goal set ( as all companies do) So reverting back to basic definitions is pointless.

EA is a publicly traded company so they make video games to earn a return on investment for their shareholders. If that return on investment is not being met at or is failing to meet an adequate rate of return. Then it could be considered a failure based off of opportunity cost.

Agreed, but in that scenario, a company would cut losses and attempt to recoup. As SWTOR is seeing continued development, and EA has extended their licensing agreement for Star Wars, chances are they are at least close to meeting their projections. This is just speculation on my part, but it seems to make sense to me.

This isn't really true. The RoI is going to be dependent on the initial costs largely and those are sunk costs. For the purpose of cutting losses, you ignore your sunk costs here. The license for Star Wars is going to be used for a lot more games than just SWTOR and for Disney EA is a great partner to have here because they are going to be putting out a lot of Star Wars games (at least in all probability).

Originally posted by wildscore12

Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by Tygranir
Originally posted by Netspook
Originally posted by Tygranir
So, you don't think it was successful. That's fine. What you think doesn't change the fact that they have recouped their costs and are currently in the black with SWTOR. To me, and in concourse with the definition of the word, SWTOR is a success.

So, according to you, if I invest 100 dollar and get 101 back, that's a success.

You clearly don't know much about economics. There's no such thing as a "successful Investment" when you could easily increase the profit by investing the money on something else.

I have no idead about how MUCH they're earning on SWTOR, but then again, neither do you.

Well, they claim $139 Mil from the Cartel market for last year. They also state the stabilized subs just under 500,000. 500,000 subs at $15 a month is $90 Mil for the year. I'm sure you can do the rest yourself. And yes, any financial gain is profit. If your goal is profit, then you have achieved your goal, which denotes success. If your goal was a certain level of profit, then you would need to attain that. Only EA knows if they are gaining the success that they are currently aiming for. As we do not have that information, we need to revert to basic definitions. Companies make video games to earn money. If more money is made than is needed to develop, sustain, and progress the game, then it is successful in that endeavor. How successful is subjective.

No, they did not claim they made $139 million from the Cartel Market last year. A third party estimate they had $139 million in revenue from F2P. After they said the game stabilized at 500k, they reported that they had a 19% decrease in subscription revenue driven primarily by SWTOR.

Again, no one competent uses your definition of success. I certainly hope you don't use it for your retirement planning because it will be horrifically unsuccessful.

And no one competent uses your definition of failure.

For the last two years they have improved the game with updates and content? CHECK

Healthy impressive revenue stream? CHECK

profitable? CHECK

Over a million customer which is top three in the field? CHECK

That does not EQUAL FAILURE TO ANYONE. Those are the facts normal people know, those are the facts normal people base their opinion on. Normal people don't try and twist the facts like you to make your ridiculous idea of how business works work.

You invested $10,000 in your retirement fund.

When you retired 60 years later, you had $11,000 in your retirement fund! Success? No, epic failure.

Originally posted by dirtyd77

Originally posted by wildscore12
And no one competent uses your definition of failure.

For the last two years they have improved the game with updates and content? CHECK

Healthy impressive revenue stream? CHECK

profitable? CHECK

Over a million customer which is top three in the field? CHECK

That does not EQUAL FAILURE TO ANYONE. Those are the facts normal people know, those are the facts normal people base their opinion on. Normal people don't try and twist the facts like you to make your ridiculous idea of how business works work.

I don't think he is calling it a failure. I think I recall seeing a few post back where he said it was a success. I think he is just arguing with your knowledge/understanding of Business/Economics.

I am calling it a failure. The game would have never been made if this outcome was foreseen or would have taken a radically different development path. It's no disaster like the Titanic as another poster claimed. You only have to look at EA's stock price immediately preceding the release and following the release as it continually underperformed.

Tygranir · March 2014

Originally posted by GeezerGamer
Originally posted by Tygranir
Originally posted by GeezerGamer
Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by GeezerGamer

I don't know if you played the game or not or stuck with it if you did play, but they did numerous good things with the game (unfortunately after most people had moved on).

I played a little. I am more a Sci Fi fan than fantasy. Been tossing the idea of re installing it. Probably will and give it a whirl. While I play GW2 and wait to see if TESO and / or WildStar are going to be right for me.

I've been waiting with baited breath for Anarchy Online to announce the status of their now beta engine update. However, recent announcements concerning other updates to that game have left me disappointed again. So now, I am not sure what Sci Fi MMO is out there for me.

I'd definitely say give it another try. It has come a long ways from where it was 2 years ago. Also, if you use my referral link below, you get some nifty perks (And I get a cool in game pet )

I'd take you up on that, but I do have an account. I'd probably just log back into my old character.

There are perks for returning players, as long as you have been gone for at least 90 days. Includes some extra inventory space and other things

Edit: this is what returning players get for using my link

Previous Subscribers enjoy seven days of subscription level access with unlimited access to missions and features up to Level 50 plus the following:

Preferred Friends Bundle includes:

Unlock: Inventory Module
Unlock: Crew Skill Slot
Customization Control: Display Titles
Customization Control: Unify Colors

One Complimentary Character Transfer for the lifetime of the account. For a full list of Subscriber benefits, visit

GeezerGamer · March 2014

Originally posted by Tygranir
Originally posted by GeezerGamer
Originally posted by Tygranir
Originally posted by GeezerGamer
Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by GeezerGamer

I don't know if you played the game or not or stuck with it if you did play, but they did numerous good things with the game (unfortunately after most people had moved on).

I played a little. I am more a Sci Fi fan than fantasy. Been tossing the idea of re installing it. Probably will and give it a whirl. While I play GW2 and wait to see if TESO and / or WildStar are going to be right for me.

I've been waiting with baited breath for Anarchy Online to announce the status of their now beta engine update. However, recent announcements concerning other updates to that game have left me disappointed again. So now, I am not sure what Sci Fi MMO is out there for me.

I'd definitely say give it another try. It has come a long ways from where it was 2 years ago. Also, if you use my referral link below, you get some nifty perks (And I get a cool in game pet )

I'd take you up on that, but I do have an account. I'd probably just log back into my old character.

There are perks for returning players, as long as you have been gone for at least 90 days. Includes some extra inventory space and other things

If the game is as good as people say. and I can see myself playing it long term, I'd even be willing to sub.

But those are big "IF"s to me.

marsh9799 · March 2014

Originally posted by wildscore12
Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by GeezerGamer
I recall reading an interview where the EA CFO said in an off the cuff one liner, "SWTOR is profitable" with nothing to follow that statement up with. Well, OK, so he said the game is profitable and I am not going to call anyone a liar so I will assume the game is making money. I have no reason not to believe it is not making money.

There is pretty much a 100% chance he's telling the truth. A lot of people have talked about EA lying. They aren't lying. They may not be giving the complete picture, but lying would get them in a world of trouble with the SEC.

But here is what we (or maybe it's just me but I'm willing to hear out) don't know entirely.

How many hundreds of millions did BW spend on development?

We don't know, but there were several estimates of $200 million in development costs. There was another estimate that the total cost- which would have included Bioware buyout, marketing, etc.- was $500 million.

Beyond that, How much did EA spend to acquire BW?

If I remember right, it was around $850-$900 million but included some other studio that Bioware partnered with. I don't know if we know what each company was valued at in the purchase.

I believe it was referenced that Disney is getting 35% from SWTOR.

I'm pretty sure the value has not been stated. It is an after payout royalty and has been speculated to be between 30% and 35% which is probably accurate.

In the same interview where EA said the gaem was profitable, it also says SWTOR had a rocky 1st year.

How much did EA need to spend on the F2P conversion?

Not available.

After a rocky 1st year, that means 2013 was really SWTOR's 1st "profitable" year.

Not available, but at 7 months in I believe EA stated "at some point, the game will be profitable."

What is the extent of that profit....not revenue...profit?

Not available. We can make some educated guesses but nothing with much precision.

How much from the above expenses (if not more) does EA still owe shareholders for this title?

Zero. EA never owed shareholders for the title. I'm a little confused here- could you clarify?

So, just how much overhead/loss/expense what have you can one profitable year recover?

Something less than infinity :-) There's no real upper limit. I've seen investments pay for themselves 10 times over in a single year and ones that have yet to pay out after six years.

I certainly don't have all the facts, but I do find it hard to believe that this game has turned any corners beyond the 1st (They stopped the bleeding) and still has a long way to go to become a success story.

I don't know if you played the game or not or stuck with it if you did play, but they did numerous good things with the game (unfortunately after most people had moved on).

Geez where did you copy/paste that garbage from? Lots of "I don't know" "not available" "if I remember right" "which is probably accurate" "we don't know"

Some how you make it sound like EA only bought BW for SWTOR? Pretty sure there was a lot more games to BW library than just SWTOR. Maybe you should read what you copy/paste next time.

Lots of "I don't know" meaning used twice and once in asking the poster if he played the game. /eyeroll

Not available means the information is not publicly available. There not really much at all in the way of publicly availble information from EA on the game.

Probably accurate means probably accurate. That would be in line with expectations. The number has never been given, but it would be expected to be in that range.

EA bought Bioware and Pandemic for $860 million. I apologize for not remember the exact number or the other company involved. And I in no way imply that EA bought Bioware only for SWTOR.

There was no cut and pasting involved in that post...

marsh9799 · March 2014

Originally posted by wildscore12

I am calling it a failure. The game would have never been made if this outcome was foreseen or would have taken a radically different development path. It's no disaster like the Titanic as another poster claimed. You only have to look at EA's stock price immediately preceding the release and following the release as it continually underperformed.

1st we are not talking about a retirement fund. We are talking about a video game, so your analogy like everything else is ridiculous.

2nd sure feel free to look at EA stock. Notice once they went F2p how EA stock took off. I mean if you think the stock falls only because of one game that means it shot up because of the same games performance.

http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/charts?Symbol=US:EA#{"zRange":"7","startDate":"2011-3-11","endDate":"2014-3-11","chartStyle":"mountain","chartCursor":"1","scaleType":"0","yaxisAlign":"right","mode":"pan"}

3rd I posted two quotes by you that stated it was a failure now your trying to run from your own quotes?

1.) No, we're talking about RoI. The analogy is dead on. You claim for unknown and incomprehensible reasons that ANY profit at all over ANY time frame makes something a success. That is incredibly foolish.

2.) The EA stock did not "take off" when it went F2P.

3.) Where do I run from my quotes? I recommend Hooked on Phonics.

marsh9799 · March 2014

Originally posted by wildscore12
Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by wildscore12

Geez where did you copy/paste that garbage from? Lots of "I don't know" "not available" "if I remember right" "which is probably accurate" "we don't know"

Some how you make it sound like EA only bought BW for SWTOR? Pretty sure there was a lot more games to BW library than just SWTOR. Maybe you should read what you copy/paste next time.

Lots of "I don't know" meaning used twice and once in asking the poster if he played the game. /eyeroll

Not available means the information is not publicly available. There not really much at all in the way of publicly availble information from EA on the game.

Probably accurate means probably accurate. That would be in line with expectations. The number has never been given, but it would be expected to be in that range.

EA bought Bioware and Pandemic for $860 million. I apologize for not remember the exact number or the other company involved. And I in no way imply that EA bought Bioware only for SWTOR.

There was no cut and pasting involved in that post...

Yep just a lot of information YOU don't know, just like most of your post.

By your line of logic, the game cannot be called a success then because we don't know this information. Oh, that's right, anything that's profitable is a success... /eyeroll

GeezerGamer · March 2014

For what it's worth, I am updating the client installer now.

Regardless of it's financial stability, I will soon see for myself if this game has turned any corners and can be considered a success or failure.

DocBrody · March 2014

they only failed to meet their own expectations

They wanted to keep the game sub only -> failed

They wanted to keep the whole launch team and add tons of content every month -> failed

They wanted to become the biggest MMO in history -> failed

220 servers merged to, what, 20 ?

empty fleets before the merge, player name losses..

Muke · March 2014

for me:

I am a sandbox lover so I want freedom, with that said I missed:

-no open world

-themepark level grind, questhub to questhub, ther eis no alternative.

-instanced PVP

-no lasting effects on the gameworld

-no real options to do World PVP apart from a few zones.

-game engine cant handle more then 10 players in the same spot, even warzones started to lag to 1fps with aoe spammed around

-space on rails, no freedom

-no item decay, no death penalties

-bounty hunting outside of the scripted BH storyline? not possible.

-restricting F2P system (too much)

If they fixed that or make a Swtor sandbox with a better engine they might get my attention again. For me sandboxes equal long playing time, themeparks are like 1-use only, you get to end and you're done.

Hulluck · March 2014

Originally posted by DocBrody
they only failed to meet their own expectations

They wanted to keep the game sub only -> failed

They wanted to keep the whole launch team and add tons of content every month -> failed

They wanted to become the biggest MMO in history -> failed

220 servers merged to, what, 20 ?

empty fleets before the merge, player name losses..

"Turning a hurting business around into a sustainable one is a fail." On what planet do you live? Next time you are at work and make a mistake or don't meet expectations they should fire you on the spot. There's no way you can ever correct that mistake or turn it around. For that matter next time you do something wrong to someone period. Not just work but in a relationship. The minute you do something wrong that person should dis-own you forever. Regardless of who they are. See what I did there?

You listed such petty reasons to hate anything.

edit just to say. The post above me I get (by Muke). But yours.You just seem like you wanted to jump on bandwagon just to fit in.

Sevenstar61 · March 2014

It was successful in my eyes as I absolutely love it. The best game I've ever played and I tried SWG - though I admit I could stomach it only for max 1 hour or so. Sorry folks.

And I don't care what everybody else think.

Cheers

TheLizardbones · March 2014

I'm going to respond to several things at once, but I'm not going to try and multi-quote people with the ridiculously long post trails.

@marsh9799 - You do not have a reasonable estimate of what it cost to make SWToR. If you did, it wouldn't vary by as much as a hundred million dollars depending on who you talk to. Nobody knows how much SWToR cost to build except EA, and they aren't telling anyone. You stated that part of the reason for your belief that SWToR is a failure is the cost of the game. It's your first reason in the list, after the royalty being paid on the IP. "Additionally, the royalty they're paying to Lucas or maybe Disney now is a massive blow to the economics of the game. The game is a failure primarily because of the cost, development time, and expectation." (marsh9799) You don't even know what the royalty payment is, so there's no way for you to judge whether or not it's massive. You are making sweeping financial judgements with no actual numbers other than the revenue numbers from their cash shop last year, which is itself an (educated) estimate by SuperData Research. We have your judgement, based on no numbers versus statements from EA saying the game is not only profitable, but doing well. They have the numbers, so they are more likely correct. They are the ones who may suffer consequences if they are fibbing about their stuff.

Not only that, but consider this. EA is a fairly large company. All that money they are spending on SWToR could be spent on some other project. They aren't spending that money anywhere else, so unless they are irrational, the money they are spending on SWToR is the best possible use of that money. Any alternative use is "next best". When they tell investors that the game is profitable, they mean not only is it making more money than what they are spending on it, it's making at least as much money as their next best alternative, probably more. That next best alternative is probably another version of Call of Duty or whatever their war based FPS game is. They are also funneling more money into the game for additional development and are going to expand the IP because of their deal with Disney. There is no reason to do this unless they are going to make money off the deal somewhere, more money than they would spending all that money on something else.

Actually, that's it. Apparently I have a couple different threads mixed together in my head. Sorry, I'm only responding to marsh9799 in this thread, and I'm not quoting anything except that one little bit.

Hulluck · March 2014

Originally posted by lizardbones
I'm going to respond to several things at once, but I'm not going to try and multi-quote people with the ridiculously long post trails.

@marsh9799 - You do not have a reasonable estimate of what it cost to make SWToR. If you did, it wouldn't vary by as much as a hundred million dollars depending on who you talk to. Nobody knows how much SWToR cost to build except EA, and they aren't telling anyone. You stated that part of the reason for your belief that SWToR is a failure is the cost of the game. It's your first reason in the list, after the royalty being paid on the IP. "Additionally, the royalty they're paying to Lucas or maybe Disney now is a massive blow to the economics of the game. The game is a failure primarily because of the cost, development time, and expectation." (marsh9799) You don't even know what the royalty payment is, so there's no way for you to judge whether or not it's massive. You are making sweeping financial judgements with no actual numbers other than the revenue numbers from their cash shop last year, which is itself an (educated) estimate by SuperData Research. We have your judgement, based on no numbers versus statements from EA saying the game is not only profitable, but doing well. They have the numbers, so they are more likely correct. They are the ones who may suffer consequences if they are fibbing about their stuff.

Not only that, but consider this. EA is a fairly large company. All that money they are spending on SWToR could be spent on some other project. They aren't spending that money anywhere else, so unless they are irrational, the money they are spending on SWToR is the best possible use of that money. Any alternative use is "next best". When they tell investors that the game is profitable, they mean not only is it making more money than what they are spending on it, it's making at least as much money as their next best alternative, probably more. That next best alternative is probably another version of Call of Duty or whatever their war based FPS game is. They are also funneling more money into the game for additional development and are going to expand the IP because of their deal with Disney. There is no reason to do this unless they are going to make money off the deal somewhere, more money than they would spending all that money on something else.

Actually, that's it. Apparently I have a couple different threads mixed together in my head. Sorry, I'm only responding to marsh9799 in this thread, and I'm not quoting anything except that one little bit.

EA is also fairly well known to not hesitate for to long and just pull the plug on what they think is a failure/under-achiever. Something that should be so obvious to people. The very thing's people partially hate EA for. Yet SWTOR is still kicking. I don't know how it's doing but clearly it's not nearly as bad off as a lot on this site have been leading people to believe for a year. I still haven't looked at the game yet. Said I was going to awhile back in a thread I made about pets.

Tabmowe · March 2014

too much focus on "The next WoW killer". too many servers at start. the constant bitter hatred of SWG fans ,lame game engine. EA took people for granted,we would just throw money at them because its Star Wars. Generic MMO

Acebets70 · March 2014

pvp planet Ilum....lol

marsh9799 · March 2014

Originally posted by wildscore12
Originally posted by marsh9799
Originally posted by wildscore12

I am calling it a failure. The game would have never been made if this outcome was foreseen or would have taken a radically different development path. It's no disaster like the Titanic as another poster claimed. You only have to look at EA's stock price immediately preceding the release and following the release as it continually underperformed.
1st we are not talking about a retirement fund. We are talking about a video game, so your analogy like everything else is ridiculous. 2nd sure feel free to look at EA stock. Notice once they went F2p how EA stock took off. I mean if you think the stock falls only because of one game that means it shot up because of the same games performance. http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/charts?Symbol=US:EA#{"zRange":"7","startDate":"2011-3-11","endDate":"2014-3-11","chartStyle":"mountain","chartCursor":"1","scaleType":"0","yaxisAlign":"right","mode":"pan"} 3rd I posted two quotes by you that stated it was a failure now your trying to run from your own quotes?
1.) No, we're talking about RoI. The analogy is dead on. You claim for unknown and incomprehensible reasons that ANY profit at all over ANY time frame makes something a success. That is incredibly foolish. 2.) The EA stock did not "take off" when it went F2P. 3.) Where do I run from my quotes? I recommend Hooked on Phonics.
Being a business major LOL. Yeah I have my Masters in MMORPGOLGY I would think you could read stocks. Plus your statement was preceding and directly after release the stock will reflect the games performance. Well before release the stock was at Nov.22nd 14.82 after release Feb 18th 19.28. Hmm not really seeing a major decline like you said... F2p now...Nov 15 13.05, Dec 13 15.30, Feb '13 17.37, TODAY 29.38. Yeah I would say they shot up after F2P.

I'd check out Hooked on Phonics as the reason you don't see the major decline is because you can't read dates. You picked the dates for one year after the release. From Nov. 11, 2011 to February 24, 2012, the stock priced dropped by around 30%. It continues dropping until it hits rock bottom at $11.72. This was largely due to the biggest release in EA's history (in EA's own words) and likely gaming history at that point in time. It comes despite the releases of Battlefield 3 and Mass Effect 3. Battlefield 3 being a massive success and EA's fastest selling game in its history. For the period it went F2P, it's much harder to attribute that rise to SWTOR. Madden and FIFA are released at that time of the year and there have been several successful titles since then.

So, a game that bears much, if not all, of the responsibility for a 52% drop in stock price that from which it takes more than a year and a half to recover? Failure.

CazNeerg · March 2014

Originally posted by marsh9799
So, a game that bears much, if not all, of the responsibility for a 52% drop in stock price that from which it takes more than a year and a half to recover? Failure.

Total speculation.

Howdy, Stranger!

Why is this game considered a failure?

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Why is this game considered a failure?

Comments