Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

EA profits are up and SWTOR gets mentioned

24

Comments

  • UhwopUhwop Member UncommonPosts: 1,791

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

  • FoobarxFoobarx Member Posts: 451
    Originally posted by allday88
    So how many of you haters hating on a video game going on 4 years now, screamed at the top of your lungs when EA did not mention Swtor in their reports?  Now they do mention Swtor in their report and it puts you guys in desperation mode attempting to spin the language to benefit your agenda.  Don't you think it's time to move on? 

    But the deer...

     

    ... the headlights

     

    caught in...

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

    Dont point out the obvious, it will get you trolled and banned around here when SWTOR is in question.

    Just a little reminder:

    http://www.torstatus.net/shards/eu/trends

    And two thumbs up for yet another EA financial report where EA hides SWTOR numbers behind other successful games and people actually make threads like this with title like this its almost as if some alternate universe posts end up here by mistake.

  • ShodanasShodanas Member RarePosts: 1,933

    It's entertaining watching haters trying to nitpick and bend words and phrases in order to produce "solid" arguments. 

    I don't need numbers to judge how the game is doing. I see it everyday with my eyes on the 2 realms i play on

     

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by Shodanas

    It's entertaining watching haters trying to nitpick and bend words and phrases in order to produce "solid" arguments. 

    I don't need numbers to judge how the game is doing. I see it everyday with my eyes on the 2 realms i play on. 

    Yeah, screw the facts im living by anecdotal evidence!

  • ShodanasShodanas Member RarePosts: 1,933
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

    Dont point out the obvious, it will get you trolled and banned around here when SWTOR is in question.

    Just a little reminder:

    http://www.torstatus.net/shards/eu/trends

    And two thumbs up for yet another EA financial report where EA hides SWTOR numbers behind other successful games and people actually make threads like this with title like this.

    Very sly from you presenting data from the EU amid the summer season. Post them again after September.

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by Shodanas
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

    Dont point out the obvious, it will get you trolled and banned around here when SWTOR is in question.

    Just a little reminder:

    http://www.torstatus.net/shards/eu/trends

    And two thumbs up for yet another EA financial report where EA hides SWTOR numbers behind other successful games and people actually make threads like this with title like this.

    Very sly from you presenting data from the EU amid the summer season. Post them again after September.

    Data goes YEAR back dude.

  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

    Dont point out the obvious, it will get you trolled and banned around here when SWTOR is in question.

    Just a little reminder:

    http://www.torstatus.net/shards/eu/trends

    And two thumbs up for yet another EA financial report where EA hides SWTOR numbers behind other successful games and people actually make threads like this with title like this.

    What Uwop did was actually post some information, please don't petty it up with this type of rhetoric.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

    Dont point out the obvious, it will get you trolled and banned around here when SWTOR is in question.

    Just a little reminder:

    http://www.torstatus.net/shards/eu/trends

    And two thumbs up for yet another EA financial report where EA hides SWTOR numbers behind other successful games and people actually make threads like this with title like this.

    What Uwop did was actually post some information, please don't petty it up with this type of rhetoric.

    Petty rethoric?

    Sorry if im not the guy for beating around the bushes and corporate phrases that are forged for single purpose of bullshiting and prefer direct approach to things. If you ever participated on the level in question you would actually find things written here hilarious (as i do).

  • FrostveinFrostvein Member UncommonPosts: 157
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by Frostvein
    Originally posted by Foobarx
    Originally posted by Frostvein

    I still don't understand how this game produces as little content as it does, if it is making as much money as it does. Its befuddling.

     

    I know people are throwing money at it hands over first as they do in most every F2P game, but something doesn't add up.

    1.  It's a money laundering scheme by some big drug cartel;

    2.  The numbers really don't add up; or,

    3.  The people who actually play the game, don't make posts about the game.

     

    My vote is for number 3.

     

    I never said it didn't make money, or that it wasn't making money. It just seems odd to me that despite several posts saying the game is doing well and making money (which is more than likely true, no doubt about it) that there is as little new content as there is, no?

     

    Other smaller companies that are (supposedly) making much less money produce content at a much faster pace. Its puzzling.

     

    Would you care to quantify the amount of content produced for SWToR?  We know how many updates there have been, because they are listed on their website, but you seem to be over simplifying the process of comparing updates between games.

     

    So which smaller companies are producing more actual content than EA is for SWToR, and how are you quantifying that content?  Just curious.

     

    I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure the guys behind LOTRO, GW2 and Rift had smaller companies, lower budgets, and less income per month then SWTOR had/has and yet produced more content at a faster pace than SWTOR did/does.

     

  • ryvendarkryvendark Member Posts: 141
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

    Dont point out the obvious, it will get you trolled and banned around here when SWTOR is in question.

    Just a little reminder:

    http://www.torstatus.net/shards/eu/trends

    And two thumbs up for yet another EA financial report where EA hides SWTOR numbers behind other successful games and people actually make threads like this with title like this.

    What Uwop did was actually post some information, please don't petty it up with this type of rhetoric.

    Petty rethoric?

    Sorry if im not the guy for beating around the bushes and corporate phrases that are forged for single purpose of bullshiting and prefer direct approach to things. If you ever participated on the level in question you would actually find things written here hilarious (as i do).

    How is a third party server stat link "proof" that what EA is saying is a lie ?

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by ryvendark
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

    Dont point out the obvious, it will get you trolled and banned around here when SWTOR is in question.

    Just a little reminder:

    http://www.torstatus.net/shards/eu/trends

    And two thumbs up for yet another EA financial report where EA hides SWTOR numbers behind other successful games and people actually make threads like this with title like this.

    What Uwop did was actually post some information, please don't petty it up with this type of rhetoric.

    Petty rethoric?

    Sorry if im not the guy for beating around the bushes and corporate phrases that are forged for single purpose of bullshiting and prefer direct approach to things. If you ever participated on the level in question you would actually find things written here hilarious (as i do).

    How is a third party server stat link "proof" that what EA is saying is a lie ?

    What is EA saying exactly?

    And where did anyone say EA lies about anything?

  • ryvendarkryvendark Member Posts: 141
    What was your link saying and what did it have to do with this thread?
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by ryvendark
    What was your link saying and what did it have to do with this thread?
    Really dude, and i mean it, really.
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Member CommonPosts: 10,910
    Originally posted by Frostvein
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by Frostvein
    Originally posted by Foobarx
    Originally posted by Frostvein

    I still don't understand how this game produces as little content as it does, if it is making as much money as it does. Its befuddling.

     

    I know people are throwing money at it hands over first as they do in most every F2P game, but something doesn't add up.

    1.  It's a money laundering scheme by some big drug cartel;

    2.  The numbers really don't add up; or,

    3.  The people who actually play the game, don't make posts about the game.

     

    My vote is for number 3.

     

    I never said it didn't make money, or that it wasn't making money. It just seems odd to me that despite several posts saying the game is doing well and making money (which is more than likely true, no doubt about it) that there is as little new content as there is, no?

     

    Other smaller companies that are (supposedly) making much less money produce content at a much faster pace. Its puzzling.

     

    Would you care to quantify the amount of content produced for SWToR?  We know how many updates there have been, because they are listed on their website, but you seem to be over simplifying the process of comparing updates between games.

     

    So which smaller companies are producing more actual content than EA is for SWToR, and how are you quantifying that content?  Just curious.

     

    I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure the guys behind LOTRO, GW2 and Rift had smaller companies, lower budgets, and less income per month then SWTOR had/has and yet produced more content at a faster pace than SWTOR did/does.

     

     

    How are you quantifying "more" in this context?  More frequent?  More feature updates?  More territory added per update?

     

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by Frostvein
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by Frostvein
    Originally posted by Foobarx
    Originally posted by Frostvein

    I still don't understand how this game produces as little content as it does, if it is making as much money as it does. Its befuddling.

     

    I know people are throwing money at it hands over first as they do in most every F2P game, but something doesn't add up.

    1.  It's a money laundering scheme by some big drug cartel;

    2.  The numbers really don't add up; or,

    3.  The people who actually play the game, don't make posts about the game.

     

    My vote is for number 3.

     

    I never said it didn't make money, or that it wasn't making money. It just seems odd to me that despite several posts saying the game is doing well and making money (which is more than likely true, no doubt about it) that there is as little new content as there is, no?

     

    Other smaller companies that are (supposedly) making much less money produce content at a much faster pace. Its puzzling.

     

    Would you care to quantify the amount of content produced for SWToR?  We know how many updates there have been, because they are listed on their website, but you seem to be over simplifying the process of comparing updates between games.

     

    So which smaller companies are producing more actual content than EA is for SWToR, and how are you quantifying that content?  Just curious.

     

    I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure the guys behind LOTRO, GW2 and Rift had smaller companies, lower budgets, and less income per month then SWTOR had/has and yet produced more content at a faster pace than SWTOR did/does.

     

    Well, after all the layoffs SWTOR had, theres not many left, most of the stuff they released was bascially finished at launch and they just administered (read: chopping it to last longer) releasing it (namely Makeb and a bit after Makeb).

    But yeah, its not even remotely close to what BW/EA were talking about around launch (but thats water under he bridge heh)

    GW2 team is quite bigger than any of those (it has actually grown since launch), thats why you get new content every 2 weeks.

  • BadOrbBadOrb Member UncommonPosts: 791
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by Frostvein
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by Frostvein
    Originally posted by Foobarx
    Originally posted by Frostvein

    I still don't understand how this game produces as little content as it does, if it is making as much money as it does. Its befuddling.

     

    I know people are throwing money at it hands over first as they do in most every F2P game, but something doesn't add up.

    1.  It's a money laundering scheme by some big drug cartel;

    2.  The numbers really don't add up; or,

    3.  The people who actually play the game, don't make posts about the game.

     

    My vote is for number 3.

     

    I never said it didn't make money, or that it wasn't making money. It just seems odd to me that despite several posts saying the game is doing well and making money (which is more than likely true, no doubt about it) that there is as little new content as there is, no?

     

    Other smaller companies that are (supposedly) making much less money produce content at a much faster pace. Its puzzling.

     

    Would you care to quantify the amount of content produced for SWToR?  We know how many updates there have been, because they are listed on their website, but you seem to be over simplifying the process of comparing updates between games.

     

    So which smaller companies are producing more actual content than EA is for SWToR, and how are you quantifying that content?  Just curious.

     

    I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure the guys behind LOTRO, GW2 and Rift had smaller companies, lower budgets, and less income per month then SWTOR had/has and yet produced more content at a faster pace than SWTOR did/does.

     

    Well, after all the layoffs SWTOR had, theres not many left, most of the stuff they released was bascially finished at launch and they just administered (read: chopping it to last longer) releasing it (namely Makeb and a bit after Makeb).

    But yeah, its not even remotely close to what BW/EA were talking about around launch (but thats water under he bridge heh)

    GW2 team is quite bigger than any of those (it has actually grown since launch), thats why you get new content every 2 weeks.

    I find it amusing people still use the , no new content is new. Even BioWare themselves laughed at it a few months ago on a twitch stream.

     

    The point is its making money , who cares how much , I don't and the ship hasn't sunk like many thought/wanted it to do.

     

    As for content , well we are going to have 2 expansions within the space of 5 months , so meh , that's fine by me.

     

    Plus you missed the many recruitment posts for swtor and yes there has been a lot of dev recruitment going on since the layoffs.

     

    Cheers,

     

    BadOrb.

    PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing.
    "SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13
    The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]

  • ryvendarkryvendark Member Posts: 141
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by ryvendark
    What was your link saying and what did it have to do with this thread?
    Really dude, and i mean it, really.

    I guess you went and looked up what rhetoric means ? I didn't really expect you to be able to answer that.

  • jpnzjpnz Member Posts: 3,529
    There is much hilariously bad posts and just facepalm logic here.
    Esp from those who say ' superdata and the pdf don't match exactly! '
    Course it doesn't. Superdata is all of 2013 and the pdf is 3 months of 2014.

    If you can't do basic projection /trends, probably not a good idea to post and prove you cannot to other people. ROFL!

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by ryvendark
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by ryvendark
    What was your link saying and what did it have to do with this thread?
    Really dude, and i mean it, really.

    I guess you went and looked up what rhetoric means ? I didn't really expect you to be able to answer that.

    Well, continuing this would only make you more and more angry and we dont want more angry posts, so ill leave it at that.

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by jpnz
    There is much hilariously bad posts and just facepalm logic here.
    Esp from those who say ' superdata and the pdf don't match exactly! '
    Course it doesn't. Superdata is all of 2013 and the pdf is 3 months of 2014.

    If you can't do basic projection /trends, probably not a good idea to post and prove you cannot to other people. ROFL!

    You mean your OP? Because its right there unchallenged 1st spot on that list.

    I agree. And i commend you for admitting writing complete nonsense in your OP.

  • ryvendarkryvendark Member Posts: 141
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by ryvendark
    Originally posted by Malabooga
    Originally posted by ryvendark
    What was your link saying and what did it have to do with this thread?
    Really dude, and i mean it, really.

    I guess you went and looked up what rhetoric means ? I didn't really expect you to be able to answer that.

    Well, continuing this would only make you more and more angry and we dont want more angry posts, so ill leave it at that.

    Ahhhh I'm angry that's why you can't explain it. I see....... that makes sense now.  /laugh

     

     

  • ShaighShaigh Member EpicPosts: 2,129

    I love the title of this thread, but let's see what games do get mentioned in the prepared statements

    • Fifa  world cup 2014
    • Fifa 14
    • Fifa online 3
    • Ea sports ufc
    • Battlefield 4
    • Titanfall
    • The simpsons
    • Real racing 3
    • The sims freeplay
    • Da:I
    • Battlefield hardline
    • Madden nfl 15
    • Fifa 15
    • NBA live 15
    • NHL 15
    • ea sports pga tour
    • Sims 4
    • Swtor
    Hold the press, swtor gets mentioned among 18 games and all it gets is an ambiguous sentence.
    Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
  • UhwopUhwop Member UncommonPosts: 1,791
    Originally posted by allday88
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    EA is saying the opposite of superdata, and the OP didn't provide the full picture. 

    Of the 211m that quote is pointing out, ToR is a significant contributor, but not the primary. Those services listed are the primary contributors of their F2P revenue. ToR is listed last and as significant because more revenue was made by the other games listed. If ToR made 165m it would have been listed as leading their F2P revenue.  They can't list ToR as the primary contributor because that report has to follow guidelines set forth by the SEC, which means that it has to be truthful in regards to earnings, even if it's kept slightly vague.  

    BF4 premium is providing more subscription revenue than ToR, as stated in the report.  

     

     

    Geez we are going in on four years!!! Don't you think it's time for you to move on from a video game you don't like and don't play. Trying to spin the words into your favor shows the desperation most haters have these days towards Swtor.

    I don't hate ToR.  I just understand that when the report states it's a significant contributor it means that it's generating enough revenue to warrant mention but isn't the primary contributor. 

    EA states that they have 80m in subscription revenue, with BF4 premium being the primary contributor, and that several game services with ToR being a significant contributor make up 211m in revenue for their F2P services. 

    In order for ToR to be making EA 165m it would either need to be the primary revenue contributor in their F2P or subscription based revenue, their report says its neither. 

     

    [mod edit]
  • daltaniousdaltanious Member UncommonPosts: 2,381
    Originally posted by jpnz

    To further provide evidence that the numbers 'SuperData' was giving for 2013 were accurate, EA released their financials for April and June of 2014 and they both largely line up.

    Actual news article: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28415508

    Report: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ERTS/3347009108x0x770134/51193e69-721f-478a-b86b-38feff3d13db/Q1 FY15 Earnings Script - FINAL.pdf

    "Extra content and free-to-play contributed $211 million, up 19% over the prior year, led by sustained momentum and approaching 90% growth in our Ultimate Team business. We saw NHL Ultimate Team grow 50%, FIFA Ultimate Team grow nearly 80% and Madden Ultimate Team grow over 350% year-over-year. Star Wars: The Old Republic and FIFA Online 3 also continue to be significant contributors ."

     

    Course, one can believe  that EA are lying in their financials in which case you have way bigger issues than 'hating on a video game'. Like 'understanding how real-life works' etc.

    I believe they are actually 2nd most subbed MMO. No, not believe, I'm pretty sure. :-)

Sign In or Register to comment.