Would like a SWTOR fanboy to spin/defend Daniel Ericson blatantly lying a few weeks ago about server pops were down because of less hours logged but not less subs as they still had the same number of subs ?
Please , I am sure one of them can spin it , go for it.
Would like a SWTOR fanboy to spin/defend Daniel Ericson blatantly lying a few weeks ago about server pops were down because of less hours logged but not less subs as they still had the same number of subs ?
Please , I am sure one of them can spin it , go for it.
They won't. They've now swiftly moved on to the "well, all MMOs lose players after launch..." argument. I'd be surprised if you could even get many of them to acknowledge the whole "1.7 million players, because BioWare says so!" thing ever happened.
People like that never acknowledge being wrong, they just commit it to the "things I must forget ever happened" portion of their brain, and find something new to be "right" about.
Didn't EA said that they needed 1m subs for a year to break even?
It was actually 500k subs over 12 months to break even.
They also said 1 million over 12 months would be a good profit but nothing to write home about, the investors would not be happy!
You know nothing about business so stop trying. If the break even point is 500K then double that amount is definitely good news because its nearly all profit from that point on. Lets not forget that WoW did not start at 12 million subs but built up to that.
Way i look at it is that SWTOR has all the bases covered for an mmo with a story that none of them can compare too. Soon they will have dungeon finder too.
I actually run my own business but that's beside the point.
Those quotes are from EA themselves you donkey.
John Riccitiello - Electronic Arts Inc. - CEO
That was me that made the comment a number of different times. What I basically said is 0.5 million subs, we could break even at the margin.
1 million subs would be meaningfully profitable, but nothing to write home about. It certainly would not make us feel good about the investments to date. It would simply be a good business on an ongoing basis.
Massive hit sure, but that's the norm, people could say that about just about every MMO since 05. But 1.3 mil is something many sub based games wish they had, many never even reach a million in sales.
way too early to claim 1.3m as a "steady" source of subs that other mmos would love to have
Age of Conan and Warhammer launched strong and lost subs soon thereafter
SWTOR is doing better than both of those past mmos but it remains to be seen if the sub numbers are still falling
will know better at the 6 month mark --- and not just the 1st quarter
Not exactly the 80% drop the haters were predicting...
Oh well. They have Tera, and soon will have GW2 and Secret World to bet against, now.
That's funny. About the only number I remember seeing hammered again and again at 80% was the people saying the game had an 80% retention rate from the days many a magical number was pulled from poster's asses in relation to this game.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
"Star Wars: The Old Republic now has 1.3 million subscribers, with a much higher mix of
ongoing credit card consumers, but on a lower absolute number of subs."
"Let me provide you with an update on Star Wars:
Through the end of the quarter, approximately 2.4 million units have sold through. In our last
call we indicated that we had 1.7 million active subscribers, and as of the end of April we now
have 1.3 million, with a substantial portion of the decrease due to casual and trial players
cycling out of the subscriber base, driving up the overall percentage of paying subscribers.
We have already launched a number of initiatives designed to grow subscriptions. The initial
responses have been positive and we are encouraged by the gaming community’s reaction."
Considering they sold 2.4 million units and now have 1.3 million "active subscribers", they lost 48% of players in 4 months.
The wording is very clever but it does draw a distinction between "active subscribers" and "paying subscribers", which suggests that not all of the current 1.3 million subs are actually paying.
To say they are "encouraged by the gaming community's reaction" shows how out of touch they are.
I don't think they could have been any more ambiguous with their report.
Not exactly the 80% drop the haters were predicting...
Oh well. They have Tera, and soon will have GW2 and Secret World to bet against, now.
That's funny. About the only number I remember seeing hammered again and again at 80% was the people saying the game had an 80% retention rate from the days many a magical number was pulled from poster's asses in relation to this game.
I would remember such claims if they were common, because I would have agreed with them. My opinion has always been that it would have about the same retention rate as Rift, on a larger scale. Growth from launch is not something I'd see from any MMO, as WoW has always been an exception and not a rule, and Eve started with few subs and has grown gradually, like any well groomed alternative.
Not exactly the 80% drop the haters were predicting...
Oh well. They have Tera, and soon will have GW2 and Secret World to bet against, now.
I seem to recall the game going FTP at this point. It's hard to keep up with their inconsistencies when they move the goal posts every quarter.
This ^^^....It was after the free 30 days was up, It was after the first content update, 2 months it would be f2p, subs would drop off the charts, etc etc etc etc etc etc.
The hate is from wow kids, GW2 forum patrol, over hyped kids, armchair developers, you name it there have said it. 1.3 million aint so bad at all.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Not exactly the 80% drop the haters were predicting...
Oh well. They have Tera, and soon will have GW2 and Secret World to bet against, now.
That's funny. About the only number I remember seeing hammered again and again at 80% was the people saying the game had an 80% retention rate from the days many a magical number was pulled from poster's asses in relation to this game.
I would remember such claims if they were common, because I would have agreed with them. My opinion has always been that it would have about the same retention rate as Rift, on a larger scale. Growth from launch is not something I'd see from any MMO, as WoW has always been an exception and not a rule, and Eve started with few subs and has grown gradually, like any well groomed alternative.
Selective memory much?
Both were equally common.
Rift had what, 20/25% retention. Not really good.
Originally posted by Zekiah
I believe 1.3 as much as I believed 1.7.
Pretty much noone does. While "technically" they arent lying because they gave everyone free active sub, though free=/paying and we all know MMOs dont run on air, especially 200+m ones
Not exactly the 80% drop the haters were predicting...
Oh well. They have Tera, and soon will have GW2 and Secret World to bet against, now.
That's funny. About the only number I remember seeing hammered again and again at 80% was the people saying the game had an 80% retention rate from the days many a magical number was pulled from poster's asses in relation to this game.
I would remember such claims if they were common, because I would have agreed with them. My opinion has always been that it would have about the same retention rate as Rift, on a larger scale. Growth from launch is not something I'd see from any MMO, as WoW has always been an exception and not a rule, and Eve started with few subs and has grown gradually, like any well groomed alternative.
Selective memory much?
Both were equally common.
Rift had what, 20/25% retention. Not really good.
What's your point? Whether it was common or not, my statement in no way claimed that a person predicting 80% retention was a hater. It's like you're arguing just to argue.
Rift does NOT have 20-25% retention. That is ABSURD and in no way based on reality.
"Star Wars: The Old Republic now has 1.3 million subscribers, with a much higher mix of
ongoing credit card consumers, but on a lower absolute number of subs."
"Let me provide you with an update on Star Wars:
Through the end of the quarter, approximately 2.4 million units have sold through. In our last
call we indicated that we had 1.7 million active subscribers, and as of the end of April we now
have 1.3 million, with a substantial portion of the decrease due to casual and trial players
cycling out of the subscriber base, driving up the overall percentage of paying subscribers.
We have already launched a number of initiatives designed to grow subscriptions. The initial
responses have been positive and we are encouraged by the gaming community’s reaction."
Considering they sold 2.4 million units and now have 1.3 million "active subscribers", they lost 48% of players in 4 months.
The wording is very clever but it does draw a distinction between "active subscribers" and "paying subscribers", which suggests that not all of the current 1.3 million subs are actually paying.
To say they are "encouraged by the gaming community's reaction" shows how out of touch they are.
I don't think they could have been any more ambiguous with their report.
1.3M is a healthy number and I'd imagine hype played a huge part im making their launch the size it was.
It's not a bad game, but it's missing a very needed 'something'. They can continue to add stuff to the game, but it won't change the lack of that missing ingredient IMO.
Not exactly the 80% drop the haters were predicting...
Oh well. They have Tera, and soon will have GW2 and Secret World to bet against, now.
That's funny. About the only number I remember seeing hammered again and again at 80% was the people saying the game had an 80% retention rate from the days many a magical number was pulled from poster's asses in relation to this game.
I would remember such claims if they were common, because I would have agreed with them. My opinion has always been that it would have about the same retention rate as Rift, on a larger scale. Growth from launch is not something I'd see from any MMO, as WoW has always been an exception and not a rule, and Eve started with few subs and has grown gradually, like any well groomed alternative.
You must be joking. You can remember the haters but not the others? It was common as hell to the point it became a running joke around here by other posters like me when they touted it because their logic for it made no sense whatsoever.
Rather selective memory you got there.
...and what do you mean you would have agreed? Are you nuts? 80% retention is unheard of in this market. Think about what 80% retention actually means. You're treating it like new players never come into play. That isn't how it works.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Not exactly the 80% drop the haters were predicting...
Oh well. They have Tera, and soon will have GW2 and Secret World to bet against, now.
That's funny. About the only number I remember seeing hammered again and again at 80% was the people saying the game had an 80% retention rate from the days many a magical number was pulled from poster's asses in relation to this game.
I would remember such claims if they were common, because I would have agreed with them. My opinion has always been that it would have about the same retention rate as Rift, on a larger scale. Growth from launch is not something I'd see from any MMO, as WoW has always been an exception and not a rule, and Eve started with few subs and has grown gradually, like any well groomed alternative.
You must be joking. You can remember the haters but not the others? It was common as hell to the point it became a running joke around here by other posters like me when they touted it because their logic for it made no sense whatsoever.
Rather selective memory you got there.
...and what do you mean you would have agreed? Are you nuts? 80% retention is unheard of in this market. Think about what 80% retention actually means. You're treating it like new players never come into play. That isn't how it works.
Even in an MMO, new players after the first few months drop a great deal from launch. And they too will either not like the game, or like it but not stay indefinitely, the latter being people that could return when new content is developed. Even at 80% retention, there comes a point where subs will start dropping as fewer and fewer new players appear to take the place of those that quit.
Comments
Would like a SWTOR fanboy to spin/defend Daniel Ericson blatantly lying a few weeks ago about server pops were down because of less hours logged but not less subs as they still had the same number of subs ?
Please , I am sure one of them can spin it , go for it.
They won't. They've now swiftly moved on to the "well, all MMOs lose players after launch..." argument. I'd be surprised if you could even get many of them to acknowledge the whole "1.7 million players, because BioWare says so!" thing ever happened.
People like that never acknowledge being wrong, they just commit it to the "things I must forget ever happened" portion of their brain, and find something new to be "right" about.
I actually run my own business but that's beside the point.
Those quotes are from EA themselves you donkey.
John Riccitiello - Electronic Arts Inc. - CEO
That was me that made the comment a number of different times. What I basically said is 0.5 million subs, we could break even at the margin.
1 million subs would be meaningfully profitable, but nothing to write home about. It certainly would not make us feel good about the investments to date. It would simply be a good business on an ongoing basis.
way too early to claim 1.3m as a "steady" source of subs that other mmos would love to have
Age of Conan and Warhammer launched strong and lost subs soon thereafter
SWTOR is doing better than both of those past mmos but it remains to be seen if the sub numbers are still falling
will know better at the 6 month mark --- and not just the 1st quarter
EQ2 fan sites
http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ERTS/1855246619x0x566984/c10f605c-3487-488e-ad86-b5bb74fe2408/Q4_FY12_Script.pdf
"Star Wars: The Old Republic now has 1.3 million subscribers, with a much higher mix of
ongoing credit card consumers, but on a lower absolute number of subs."
"Let me provide you with an update on Star Wars:
Through the end of the quarter, approximately 2.4 million units have sold through. In our last
call we indicated that we had 1.7 million active subscribers, and as of the end of April we now
have 1.3 million, with a substantial portion of the decrease due to casual and trial players
cycling out of the subscriber base, driving up the overall percentage of paying subscribers.
We have already launched a number of initiatives designed to grow subscriptions. The initial
responses have been positive and we are encouraged by the gaming community’s reaction."
What happens when you log off your characters????.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
Dark Age of Camelot
Not exactly the 80% drop the haters were predicting...
Oh well. They have Tera, and soon will have GW2 and Secret World to bet against, now.
I seem to recall the game going FTP at this point. It's hard to keep up with their inconsistencies when they move the goal posts every quarter.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
That's funny. About the only number I remember seeing hammered again and again at 80% was the people saying the game had an 80% retention rate from the days many a magical number was pulled from poster's asses in relation to this game.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Almost as funny as 3m subs and still GROWING!
Why dont you present both sides so you wont be categorized as taking one side yourself.
oh, nevermind.
Considering they sold 2.4 million units and now have 1.3 million "active subscribers", they lost 48% of players in 4 months.
The wording is very clever but it does draw a distinction between "active subscribers" and "paying subscribers", which suggests that not all of the current 1.3 million subs are actually paying.
To say they are "encouraged by the gaming community's reaction" shows how out of touch they are.
I don't think they could have been any more ambiguous with their report.
I would remember such claims if they were common, because I would have agreed with them. My opinion has always been that it would have about the same retention rate as Rift, on a larger scale. Growth from launch is not something I'd see from any MMO, as WoW has always been an exception and not a rule, and Eve started with few subs and has grown gradually, like any well groomed alternative.
This ^^^....It was after the free 30 days was up, It was after the first content update, 2 months it would be f2p, subs would drop off the charts, etc etc etc etc etc etc.
The hate is from wow kids, GW2 forum patrol, over hyped kids, armchair developers, you name it there have said it. 1.3 million aint so bad at all.
I believe 1.3 as much as I believed 1.7.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Selective memory much?
Both were equally common.
Rift had what, 20/25% retention. Not really good.
Pretty much noone does. While "technically" they arent lying because they gave everyone free active sub, though free=/paying and we all know MMOs dont run on air, especially 200+m ones
Just hold your hands to you ears and go "LA LA LA LA LA LA"
From another site: "In a conference call this afternoon, EA said the decrease was indeed due to "casual and trial players" cycling out of the game."
See? Cycling. That means they'll all be back!
What's your point? Whether it was common or not, my statement in no way claimed that a person predicting 80% retention was a hater. It's like you're arguing just to argue.
Rift does NOT have 20-25% retention. That is ABSURD and in no way based on reality.
As of 4/30...
* We know the game has sold 2.4 million copies.
* We know there are 1.3 million "active subscribers."
* We can safely guess that something like 75k of those are on the free 30-days.
* We also know there is an unknown amount of "active subscribers" that are part of the various trial offers and have not purchased the game, yet.
1.3M is a healthy number and I'd imagine hype played a huge part im making their launch the size it was.
It's not a bad game, but it's missing a very needed 'something'. They can continue to add stuff to the game, but it won't change the lack of that missing ingredient IMO.
deleted.
Right.
carry on, nothing to see here
You must be joking. You can remember the haters but not the others? It was common as hell to the point it became a running joke around here by other posters like me when they touted it because their logic for it made no sense whatsoever.
Rather selective memory you got there.
...and what do you mean you would have agreed? Are you nuts? 80% retention is unheard of in this market. Think about what 80% retention actually means. You're treating it like new players never come into play. That isn't how it works.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Are you incapable of understanding the difference between 80% retention and an 80% drop in subs? Seriously?
Just pointing out your silly points.
Oh, and just to mention, even people who said 80% retention were "haters" lol
But of course, your selective memory selected not to memorize this
Even in an MMO, new players after the first few months drop a great deal from launch. And they too will either not like the game, or like it but not stay indefinitely, the latter being people that could return when new content is developed. Even at 80% retention, there comes a point where subs will start dropping as fewer and fewer new players appear to take the place of those that quit.