It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2012/10/peter-moore-interview
EA Chief Operating Officer has claimed the fall of SWTOR was down to people not wanting to pay $15 a month for MMO's, funny, it seems to work for WoW and EvE amongst others. Maybe $15 is too much for this game.
Comments
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
lol, payment model wasn't the problem, thx for the laughs
Looking at: The Repopulation
Preordering: None
Playing: Random Games
I wonder why instead of going F2P they dont try a lower sub cost. Maybe $7.99 a month, or $5.99 a month.
Especially if they think the sub cost is the problem.
Because EA is greedy?
The problem is they invested too much in the game already. They need to recover that somehow. Personally, I would have been much happier had they just lowered a lot of the production cost and done a B2P model or similar.
Well see how it works out though. Even with the sub fee, I got more out of TOR than I have with any other release this year.
That's why I posted it, it made me laugh, they don't seem to get that it's the fact it is a single player game charging a sub fee that's the issue rather than an industry wide issue.
I don't think it's the overall consensus that it's a single player game. I know a lot of people have expressed this, but there are many whom disagree. Just like the whole GW2 is not an MMORPG thing...some people feel that way, others don't.
To be honest, I'm not entirely sure what the overall issue is with the game...so many different theories floating around. But it may just have been a victim of its own hype.
And the dog ate my homework...
Sorry, but the only thing this guy thinks is a good game, is one that makes a lot of money.
TOR was mostly a "single player game in shared space" and that is the problem, not the $15, but the game is not a good enough MMO to be worth that.
It ain't the price, it's the game, moron.
They polled the players exiting the game, and that was the number one answer given. It worked for WoW and EvE, your right. Name a game in the last 5 years that it's worked on?
Don't get me wrong, I prefer subscriptions, but with the content burning min max crowd destroying content now, no game can charge a monthly sub for a game that players will beat in a week.
The EvE model might work(sandbox, is sandbox and the players generate the content) now, for a niche, a 300-600k sub base, but of course anything less than 10 million subs is a failure(sarcasm)
Themepark subscriptions? Not seeing it happen anytime soon. Everyone I know that plays GW2 is done(Only three people I personally know played it, but they are done with everything, and they are more on the casual side)
I don't think any sub based themepark is going to make it past that 6 months mortality rate of mmo's in todays market.
Of course, I'm a bit upset with the exit survey. I did select the choice about the game not being worth paying for, but I was being cynical about how much I disliked the games design philosophies, static worlds, and anti community build and not the fact that subs where hard to pay(that wasn't an option on the poll). I just wanted Bioware to know their game was not worth money. I guess they can take it as needing a pricing model change, but I would have preferred if they took my exit poll as a "need to change the game" more.
Wizard 101
Pirates of the Carribean Online
AdventureQuest Worlds
and mixed model games like FreeRealms, Clone Wars Adventures and LOTRO.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Yeah I agree.
If GW2 was a subbed base MMO, I think the exodus would have broken all other records. Sub based games are so 2004.
That's probably why it still works for those games. When you subscribe to EVE, WOW, DAoC or any of the other games from that era, you are getting 8-15 years of content with that sub.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
$60+$15mo for a sucktastic game.
Yep, that was the problem
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
Playing: Skyrim
Following: The Repopulation
I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
Well...
Which one are you saying is a subscription based game? non of these have cash shops and f2p options? Oh and my 11 yearold plays wizard 101, and clone wars, and I haven't paid a cent for either(too be honest though, clone wars looks alot more fun than tor lol, if only it wasn't for children)
This is a common attitude amongst CEO's and business types: it couldn't have been the actual product, it was the (bad marketting, bad messaging, bad business model, etc, etc). If they admit that the content is not worth it, it begs the question of why didn't anyone notice this before releasing it?
That would imply blame, and CEO's are very averse to blame.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
We all know that's a lie :P it wasn't the 15$ that made people quit , it was the game design at its core that was the problem there is no amount of spin EA can put on this to say otherwise. I'm hoping my self that their F2P venture falls flat and with the excessive restrictions they have for their F2P players I highly doubt this game will turn around , after hearing 2 Bioware staff members talk about if F2P doesn't meet expectations , its possible Disney/LA would be licensing SOE to continue development on SWG2.
in some ways i am still confused...
People bought a BioWare game, made by BW that to everyones shock... played like a BioWare game.
Then again i personally think that many people on this site went in with their mind set on hating the everliving daylight out of the game. (personal opinion, ain't jack you can do about it) but i guess it proves that storydriven games are better keept as Co-Op.
This have been a good conversation
We could have made more money if it was "free" to play, sucker people in then hit them with lots of $2 charges here and there.
The $15/month fee was one of the problems, not just the problem. Maybe 7 or 8 bucks a month TOPS. SWTOR's F2P model sounds like crap and does not make me want to go back to it at all. The static feeling worlds, hordes of generic quests tacked onto dialogue sequences, pointless eSports/instanced PvP and lackluster, tacked on space game all need to be revamped before I would feel it is worth $15 every month.
Frankly no MMO feels worth the $15 month sub fee to me anymore, but I will probably check out the F2P because it can't hurt to see what it is like...even if it does look like a poor F2P model.
My basic point was I 100% agree that EA's number one answer on the poll was pricing. Thats not a lie, the survey's did show people didn't want to pay for the game.
I think EA's short commings is analyzing the data. Would you eat poop if it was cheap? If the survey was a. cost money b. not enough peanuts c. wrong color d. consistency just wasn't right people would probably vote for a. When the real problem is no one wants to eat s****.
Well he is right because this game plays like a single player game, or at most a limited multiplayer game, and that is not worth 15/month.
My gaming blog