Howdy, Stranger!

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

Why is this game considered a failure?

1101112131416»

Comments

  • skyline385skyline385 Member Posts: 564
    Originally posted by marsh9799

     


    Originally posted by skyline385

    Originally posted by marsh9799

    Originally posted by skyline385

    Originally posted by marsh9799  

    Originally posted by skyline385

    Originally posted by marsh9799

    Originally posted by jpnz

    Originally posted by Droosteel

    Originally posted by jpnz

    Originally posted by Droosteel

     
    Just imagine what would closing 500m$$ Star Wars game shortly after launch do to their stock. It costed SO much that it HAD to survive no matter the cost. They just said goodbye to their investment and ever making it back. They are scraping what they can to lower the loss over the years to come.
    So we went from 300Million of EALouse (which turned out to be false) to 500 Million. Why not just say it cost 1 Billion dollars? ROFL!   Apparently, 200 million per year earnings is a 'failure' for some people. lolwut?!  
    200 million? SHOW OFFICIAL EA NUMBERS FOR SWTOR rofl No? hahahahahaha
    So... where's the official EA numbers for SWTOR? 500 Million did you say? No numbers huh? ROFL! At least that 200 Million came from a financial source. Just... /FACEPALM Whatever you are smoking has to be some good stuff so please share it. :)
    The $500 million comes from a financial source and is not comparable to the $200 million number.  Analysts estimated the production costs for the game were between $200 and $300 million with another $100 million in advertising.  The $500 million takes into account some of the Bioware acquisition.
    Since you failed to share any sources, atleast share that stuff you are smoking. It seems darn good.
    /eyeroll     https://www.google.com/#q=SWTOR+total+cost+$500+million It's so hard man... For the completely inept. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/electronic-arts-riccitiello-aims-high-2012-01-17?pagenumber=2#
    So apparently, one Analyst's estimate becomes fact now, is it? And the fact that most analysts put it at 100-300M is meant to be ignored. Classic haters.
    Actually, you've demonstrated an inability to read English or a willful ignorance of those numbers.  As I said before, the $500 million number is not comparable to the production numbers.  It is not a production cost estimate.  Classic cult fanboy.
    From the market watch article “I think it’s safe to say that the total all-in investment in ‘Star Wars’ is probably approaching half a billion dollars,” Creutz says. That's it. From the original VG article, the full line reads The one thing that everyone can agree on is that the game was expensive, and while most analysts are estimating somewhere between $100-$300 million, analyst Doug Creutz suspects that Electronic Arts has sunk nearly half a billion dollars into the project. So unless your English comprehension is poor, the line clearly reads that all the estimates are for the total. Nowhere does it state that the 100M-300M was only for developement and that 500M is with everything. But, on gamesradar i found this, http://www.gamesradar.com/analysts-eas-stake-old-republic-probably-approaches-500m/ Speaking to Market Watch, analyst Doug Creutz estimates that Electronic Arts likely invested around $500 million dollars on Star Wars: The Old Republic, factoring in development costs and EA CEO John Riccitiello’s push to acquire the game’s developer, BioWare/Pandemic. This is ridiculous. EA acquired Bioware for a variety of Game IPs and using that as an excuse to increase the costs just reeks of sensationalism and poor journalism.
    Part of the Bioware acquisition was for the purpose of developing SWTOR.  Doug Creutz factored that into his total cost estimate.  The others are actual development cost estimates.  The only one that put it at the $100 million mark was an estimate in May 2011.  He also predicted they would have 10 to 50 million players after going FTP.

     

     

    $80 million *DEVELOPMENT COSTS*

    http://www.gamespot.com/articles/star-wars-the-old-republic-has-cost-ea-80-million-analyst/1100-6312400/

    $200 million *CREATING IT*
    http://herocomplex.latimes.com/games/star-wars-the-old-republic-the-story-behind-a-galactic-gamble/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=63378#/0

    $200 - $300 million *PRODUCTION COSTS*
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/08/01/five-lessons-learned-as-swtor-surrenders/

    Again, putting some portion of acquiring costs for Bioware is plain Ridiculous and Biased. Bioware has put out a multitude of games and will continue on doing so for the upcoming decade and probably even further which all have to be accounted for in the price EA paid for the acquisition.

    Development and creating costs are essentially the same, it's just 2 articles giving different estimates.

    The Forbes guy you linked is just a contributor, he doesn't work for Forbes. Forbes is a open blog-ish site in case you didn't know. He has zero sources to back his claim. All he is doing is linking a gamespot article which links to the same LA Times article which you already linked showing 200M costs for "Creating" it. The rest of the costs, he is pulling out of nowhere. Just guessing it.

    If you are going to take some random blogger's guesswork (not even an analyst; read his bio on the Forbes page) as fact then no one can help you on this.

    image
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Member CommonPosts: 10,910
    Originally posted by marsh9799
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    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.

     We do have some reasonable estimates.  They come from investment companies who do this for a living.  I don't think the costs vary as much as you think they do.  On the royalty, this is the figures determined by investment companies who do this for a living and how would you not expect Lucas to get a 30% royalty minimum here?  I haven't seen any statements from EA indicating the game is doing well.

    Additionally, if you look at software development in general, something this large that is developed over six years is going to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    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.

     I dealt with this elsewhere.  This is a sunk cost issue.  The development costs are front loaded and become irrelevant after the game has been released in determining whether or not the game continues running.  This is why games like the original Everquest and LOTRO are still running.  You'd never develop a game for that size player base.  Once you have developed a game already, it is operationally profitable to have a player base that size.  As a side note, a lot of people have mentioned the continued game development.  Relative to most MMOs, the additional content that has been added is extremely trivial.  Galactic Starfighter is practically a separate game.  I don't even know if you can really call it true additional content for SWTOR in any real meaningful way.  They are expanding the Star Wars IP pretty much through new games exclusively.  The plan for 2014 look pretty shallow (although, the PvP flashpoints could be really awesome).

    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. 

     Again, this is an issue of what to do post-development.  You have the game.  You've already paid development costs.  Hypothetically, let's say you developed a $2 billion dollar game that makes $200 million a year.  That's a huge failure.  However, you probably aren't going to abandon the game.  The economics of continuing a produced game and creating a game are two completely separate issues.

    A good additional example can be pulled from the movie industry.  If a company releases a movie that is under performing, they don't yank it from theaters.  They've paid for the movie.  They've spent the bulk of what they'll spend on marketing.  They let it run its course.

    This is an issue of sunk costs.

     

     

    The actual cost of the game varies by $0 because the cost is what it is.  We have estimates anywhere from $150 million to apparently $500 million by everyone from gaming insiders to investors.  The point is, you do not have those numbers.  Any number you've picked is a guess.  You can call it an estimate, but it's a guess.  That's why there is such a wide variance in the estimates on how much it costs.  A fifty million dollar variance in the estimates is still a big deal though.

     

    But again, these are all financial details, which you do not have or aren't presenting.  There are a lot of details missing from your one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game.  That's fine, because they are missing from everyone's one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game. 

     

    You are doing what all the other, non-MBA people are doing, which is mixing some economic words* with your personal opinion on aspects of the game.  In your response this would be the Lucas Arts license combined with your opinion of the new content in the game.  You have a subjective opinion, just like everyone else.  What you don't have are any objective facts to point to in order to say the game is a financial failure.  It is apparently doing pretty OK financially.  Good even.  EA says so.  If you haven't read what EA has said about SWToR, in the very say quarterly reports that don't give you any detailed information on SWToR's financials, I'm not sure what to tell you.  It's there. *shrug* 

     

    Pick something else to point at like the stock price (which is now higher than it was before SWToR released), or the ridiculous claims of two million on going subscribers.  Stuff like that.  Even there, if we're going to pick out single points in time and say the game is currently a failure because of those single points in time, then there does not exist a successful MMORPG.  This should be something you're fine with doing because you get the whole sunk costs thing.  What matters is this point in time forward.

     

    * You're using them right, btw, which is odd for the people who post here, so there is that.

     

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

  • DroosteelDroosteel Member Posts: 138
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by marsh9799
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    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.

     We do have some reasonable estimates.  They come from investment companies who do this for a living.  I don't think the costs vary as much as you think they do.  On the royalty, this is the figures determined by investment companies who do this for a living and how would you not expect Lucas to get a 30% royalty minimum here?  I haven't seen any statements from EA indicating the game is doing well.

    Additionally, if you look at software development in general, something this large that is developed over six years is going to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    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.

     I dealt with this elsewhere.  This is a sunk cost issue.  The development costs are front loaded and become irrelevant after the game has been released in determining whether or not the game continues running.  This is why games like the original Everquest and LOTRO are still running.  You'd never develop a game for that size player base.  Once you have developed a game already, it is operationally profitable to have a player base that size.  As a side note, a lot of people have mentioned the continued game development.  Relative to most MMOs, the additional content that has been added is extremely trivial.  Galactic Starfighter is practically a separate game.  I don't even know if you can really call it true additional content for SWTOR in any real meaningful way.  They are expanding the Star Wars IP pretty much through new games exclusively.  The plan for 2014 look pretty shallow (although, the PvP flashpoints could be really awesome).

    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. 

     Again, this is an issue of what to do post-development.  You have the game.  You've already paid development costs.  Hypothetically, let's say you developed a $2 billion dollar game that makes $200 million a year.  That's a huge failure.  However, you probably aren't going to abandon the game.  The economics of continuing a produced game and creating a game are two completely separate issues.

    A good additional example can be pulled from the movie industry.  If a company releases a movie that is under performing, they don't yank it from theaters.  They've paid for the movie.  They've spent the bulk of what they'll spend on marketing.  They let it run its course.

    This is an issue of sunk costs.

     

     

    The actual cost of the game varies by $0 because the cost is what it is.  We have estimates anywhere from $150 million to apparently $500 million by everyone from gaming insiders to investors.  The point is, you do not have those numbers.  Any number you've picked is a guess.  You can call it an estimate, but it's a guess.  That's why there is such a wide variance in the estimates on how much it costs.  A fifty million dollar variance in the estimates is still a big deal though.

     

    But again, these are all financial details, which you do not have or aren't presenting.  There are a lot of details missing from your one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game.  That's fine, because they are missing from everyone's one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game. 

     

    You are doing what all the other, non-MBA people are doing, which is mixing some economic words* with your personal opinion on aspects of the game.  In your response this would be the Lucas Arts license combined with your opinion of the new content in the game.  You have a subjective opinion, just like everyone else.  What you don't have are any objective facts to point to in order to say the game is a financial failure.  It is apparently doing pretty OK financially.  Good even.  EA says so.  If you haven't read what EA has said about SWToR, in the very say quarterly reports that don't give you any detailed information on SWToR's financials, I'm not sure what to tell you.  It's there. *shrug* 

     

    Pick something else to point at like the stock price (which is now higher than it was before SWToR released), or the ridiculous claims of two million on going subscribers.  Stuff like that.  Even there, if we're going to pick out single points in time and say the game is currently a failure because of those single points in time, then there does not exist a successful MMORPG.  This should be something you're fine with doing because you get the whole sunk costs thing.  What matters is this point in time forward.

     

    * You're using them right, btw, which is odd for the people who post here, so there is that.

     

    You have 3 different numbers that need considering:

    1) development cost

    2) budget

    3) endevour cost

    endevour cost > budget > development cost

    Aquisition of BW HAS to be factored in and a great chunk of it becasue EA wouldnt have bought BW if it hadnt start developing Star Wars MMO in the first place, and frankly, what has BW released since it was aquired by EA that can in any meaningful way justify 800m$?

    Nothing.

    And SWTOR proved to be bust (at one point even Riccitello called it "a miss" publicly)

  • HulluckHulluck Member UncommonPosts: 839
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by marsh9799
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    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.

     We do have some reasonable estimates.  They come from investment companies who do this for a living.  I don't think the costs vary as much as you think they do.  On the royalty, this is the figures determined by investment companies who do this for a living and how would you not expect Lucas to get a 30% royalty minimum here?  I haven't seen any statements from EA indicating the game is doing well.

    Additionally, if you look at software development in general, something this large that is developed over six years is going to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    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.

     I dealt with this elsewhere.  This is a sunk cost issue.  The development costs are front loaded and become irrelevant after the game has been released in determining whether or not the game continues running.  This is why games like the original Everquest and LOTRO are still running.  You'd never develop a game for that size player base.  Once you have developed a game already, it is operationally profitable to have a player base that size.  As a side note, a lot of people have mentioned the continued game development.  Relative to most MMOs, the additional content that has been added is extremely trivial.  Galactic Starfighter is practically a separate game.  I don't even know if you can really call it true additional content for SWTOR in any real meaningful way.  They are expanding the Star Wars IP pretty much through new games exclusively.  The plan for 2014 look pretty shallow (although, the PvP flashpoints could be really awesome).

    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. 

     Again, this is an issue of what to do post-development.  You have the game.  You've already paid development costs.  Hypothetically, let's say you developed a $2 billion dollar game that makes $200 million a year.  That's a huge failure.  However, you probably aren't going to abandon the game.  The economics of continuing a produced game and creating a game are two completely separate issues.

    A good additional example can be pulled from the movie industry.  If a company releases a movie that is under performing, they don't yank it from theaters.  They've paid for the movie.  They've spent the bulk of what they'll spend on marketing.  They let it run its course.

    This is an issue of sunk costs.

     

     

    The actual cost of the game varies by $0 because the cost is what it is.  We have estimates anywhere from $150 million to apparently $500 million by everyone from gaming insiders to investors.  The point is, you do not have those numbers.  Any number you've picked is a guess.  You can call it an estimate, but it's a guess.  That's why there is such a wide variance in the estimates on how much it costs.  A fifty million dollar variance in the estimates is still a big deal though.

     

    But again, these are all financial details, which you do not have or aren't presenting.  There are a lot of details missing from your one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game.  That's fine, because they are missing from everyone's one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game. 

     

    You are doing what all the other, non-MBA people are doing, which is mixing some economic words* with your personal opinion on aspects of the game.  In your response this would be the Lucas Arts license combined with your opinion of the new content in the game.  You have a subjective opinion, just like everyone else.  What you don't have are any objective facts to point to in order to say the game is a financial failure.  It is apparently doing pretty OK financially.  Good even.  EA says so.  If you haven't read what EA has said about SWToR, in the very say quarterly reports that don't give you any detailed information on SWToR's financials, I'm not sure what to tell you.  It's there. *shrug* 

     

    Pick something else to point at like the stock price (which is now higher than it was before SWToR released), or the ridiculous claims of two million on going subscribers.  Stuff like that.  Even there, if we're going to pick out single points in time and say the game is currently a failure because of those single points in time, then there does not exist a successful MMORPG.  This should be something you're fine with doing because you get the whole sunk costs thing.  What matters is this point in time forward.

     

    * You're using them right, btw, which is odd for the people who post here, so there is that.

     

    You have 3 different numbers that need considering:

    1) development cost

    2) budget

    3) endevour cost

    endevour cost > budget > development cost

    Aquisition of BW HAS to be factored in and a great chunk of it becasue EA wouldnt have bought BW if it hadnt start developing Star Wars MMO in the first place, and frankly, what has BW released since it was aquired by EA that can in any meaningful way justify 800m$?

    Nothing.

    And SWTOR proved to be bust (at one point even Riccitello called it "a miss" publicly)

    Guess I just shit on your parade. 

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/403331/page/1

  • skyline385skyline385 Member Posts: 564
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by marsh9799
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    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.

     We do have some reasonable estimates.  They come from investment companies who do this for a living.  I don't think the costs vary as much as you think they do.  On the royalty, this is the figures determined by investment companies who do this for a living and how would you not expect Lucas to get a 30% royalty minimum here?  I haven't seen any statements from EA indicating the game is doing well.

    Additionally, if you look at software development in general, something this large that is developed over six years is going to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    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.

     I dealt with this elsewhere.  This is a sunk cost issue.  The development costs are front loaded and become irrelevant after the game has been released in determining whether or not the game continues running.  This is why games like the original Everquest and LOTRO are still running.  You'd never develop a game for that size player base.  Once you have developed a game already, it is operationally profitable to have a player base that size.  As a side note, a lot of people have mentioned the continued game development.  Relative to most MMOs, the additional content that has been added is extremely trivial.  Galactic Starfighter is practically a separate game.  I don't even know if you can really call it true additional content for SWTOR in any real meaningful way.  They are expanding the Star Wars IP pretty much through new games exclusively.  The plan for 2014 look pretty shallow (although, the PvP flashpoints could be really awesome).

    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. 

     Again, this is an issue of what to do post-development.  You have the game.  You've already paid development costs.  Hypothetically, let's say you developed a $2 billion dollar game that makes $200 million a year.  That's a huge failure.  However, you probably aren't going to abandon the game.  The economics of continuing a produced game and creating a game are two completely separate issues.

    A good additional example can be pulled from the movie industry.  If a company releases a movie that is under performing, they don't yank it from theaters.  They've paid for the movie.  They've spent the bulk of what they'll spend on marketing.  They let it run its course.

    This is an issue of sunk costs.

     

     

    The actual cost of the game varies by $0 because the cost is what it is.  We have estimates anywhere from $150 million to apparently $500 million by everyone from gaming insiders to investors.  The point is, you do not have those numbers.  Any number you've picked is a guess.  You can call it an estimate, but it's a guess.  That's why there is such a wide variance in the estimates on how much it costs.  A fifty million dollar variance in the estimates is still a big deal though.

     

    But again, these are all financial details, which you do not have or aren't presenting.  There are a lot of details missing from your one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game.  That's fine, because they are missing from everyone's one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game. 

     

    You are doing what all the other, non-MBA people are doing, which is mixing some economic words* with your personal opinion on aspects of the game.  In your response this would be the Lucas Arts license combined with your opinion of the new content in the game.  You have a subjective opinion, just like everyone else.  What you don't have are any objective facts to point to in order to say the game is a financial failure.  It is apparently doing pretty OK financially.  Good even.  EA says so.  If you haven't read what EA has said about SWToR, in the very say quarterly reports that don't give you any detailed information on SWToR's financials, I'm not sure what to tell you.  It's there. *shrug* 

     

    Pick something else to point at like the stock price (which is now higher than it was before SWToR released), or the ridiculous claims of two million on going subscribers.  Stuff like that.  Even there, if we're going to pick out single points in time and say the game is currently a failure because of those single points in time, then there does not exist a successful MMORPG.  This should be something you're fine with doing because you get the whole sunk costs thing.  What matters is this point in time forward.

     

    * You're using them right, btw, which is odd for the people who post here, so there is that.

     

    You have 3 different numbers that need considering:

    1) development cost

    2) budget

    3) endevour cost

    endevour cost > budget > development cost

    Aquisition of BW HAS to be factored in and a great chunk of it becasue EA wouldnt have bought BW if it hadnt start developing Star Wars MMO in the first place, and frankly, what has BW released since it was aquired by EA that can in any meaningful way justify 800m$?

    Nothing.

    And SWTOR proved to be bust (at one point even Riccitello called it "a miss" publicly)

    This is the reason why i wrote "Amrchair Economists".

    Do you even understand how big the IPs Dragon Age and Mass Effect are?

    The original Dragon Age Origins alone has sold 3.2Million Box copies. Do you understand this number? Now account into this all the DLCs as well as sequels and the upcoming game.

    All of the Mass Effect games have sold over 1.5Million Box copies each. Again add to this the DLCs and everything.

    And after all this, we will be DA:Inquisition this year which is getting hyped up as well as the next Mass Effect next year. And Bioware will be working on more IPs as long as EA exists. You can't factor out the future of a studio when you buy it. Both the short term and long term prospects are calculated.

    image
  • DroosteelDroosteel Member Posts: 138
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by marsh9799
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    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.

     We do have some reasonable estimates.  They come from investment companies who do this for a living.  I don't think the costs vary as much as you think they do.  On the royalty, this is the figures determined by investment companies who do this for a living and how would you not expect Lucas to get a 30% royalty minimum here?  I haven't seen any statements from EA indicating the game is doing well.

    Additionally, if you look at software development in general, something this large that is developed over six years is going to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    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.

     I dealt with this elsewhere.  This is a sunk cost issue.  The development costs are front loaded and become irrelevant after the game has been released in determining whether or not the game continues running.  This is why games like the original Everquest and LOTRO are still running.  You'd never develop a game for that size player base.  Once you have developed a game already, it is operationally profitable to have a player base that size.  As a side note, a lot of people have mentioned the continued game development.  Relative to most MMOs, the additional content that has been added is extremely trivial.  Galactic Starfighter is practically a separate game.  I don't even know if you can really call it true additional content for SWTOR in any real meaningful way.  They are expanding the Star Wars IP pretty much through new games exclusively.  The plan for 2014 look pretty shallow (although, the PvP flashpoints could be really awesome).

    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. 

     Again, this is an issue of what to do post-development.  You have the game.  You've already paid development costs.  Hypothetically, let's say you developed a $2 billion dollar game that makes $200 million a year.  That's a huge failure.  However, you probably aren't going to abandon the game.  The economics of continuing a produced game and creating a game are two completely separate issues.

    A good additional example can be pulled from the movie industry.  If a company releases a movie that is under performing, they don't yank it from theaters.  They've paid for the movie.  They've spent the bulk of what they'll spend on marketing.  They let it run its course.

    This is an issue of sunk costs.

     

     

    The actual cost of the game varies by $0 because the cost is what it is.  We have estimates anywhere from $150 million to apparently $500 million by everyone from gaming insiders to investors.  The point is, you do not have those numbers.  Any number you've picked is a guess.  You can call it an estimate, but it's a guess.  That's why there is such a wide variance in the estimates on how much it costs.  A fifty million dollar variance in the estimates is still a big deal though.

     

    But again, these are all financial details, which you do not have or aren't presenting.  There are a lot of details missing from your one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game.  That's fine, because they are missing from everyone's one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game. 

     

    You are doing what all the other, non-MBA people are doing, which is mixing some economic words* with your personal opinion on aspects of the game.  In your response this would be the Lucas Arts license combined with your opinion of the new content in the game.  You have a subjective opinion, just like everyone else.  What you don't have are any objective facts to point to in order to say the game is a financial failure.  It is apparently doing pretty OK financially.  Good even.  EA says so.  If you haven't read what EA has said about SWToR, in the very say quarterly reports that don't give you any detailed information on SWToR's financials, I'm not sure what to tell you.  It's there. *shrug* 

     

    Pick something else to point at like the stock price (which is now higher than it was before SWToR released), or the ridiculous claims of two million on going subscribers.  Stuff like that.  Even there, if we're going to pick out single points in time and say the game is currently a failure because of those single points in time, then there does not exist a successful MMORPG.  This should be something you're fine with doing because you get the whole sunk costs thing.  What matters is this point in time forward.

     

    * You're using them right, btw, which is odd for the people who post here, so there is that.

     

    You have 3 different numbers that need considering:

    1) development cost

    2) budget

    3) endevour cost

    endevour cost > budget > development cost

    Aquisition of BW HAS to be factored in and a great chunk of it becasue EA wouldnt have bought BW if it hadnt start developing Star Wars MMO in the first place, and frankly, what has BW released since it was aquired by EA that can in any meaningful way justify 800m$?

    Nothing.

    And SWTOR proved to be bust (at one point even Riccitello called it "a miss" publicly)

    Guess I just shit on your parade. 

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/403331/page/1

    Give....official....EA....numbers....

  • skyline385skyline385 Member Posts: 564
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by marsh9799
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    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.

     We do have some reasonable estimates.  They come from investment companies who do this for a living.  I don't think the costs vary as much as you think they do.  On the royalty, this is the figures determined by investment companies who do this for a living and how would you not expect Lucas to get a 30% royalty minimum here?  I haven't seen any statements from EA indicating the game is doing well.

    Additionally, if you look at software development in general, something this large that is developed over six years is going to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    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.

     I dealt with this elsewhere.  This is a sunk cost issue.  The development costs are front loaded and become irrelevant after the game has been released in determining whether or not the game continues running.  This is why games like the original Everquest and LOTRO are still running.  You'd never develop a game for that size player base.  Once you have developed a game already, it is operationally profitable to have a player base that size.  As a side note, a lot of people have mentioned the continued game development.  Relative to most MMOs, the additional content that has been added is extremely trivial.  Galactic Starfighter is practically a separate game.  I don't even know if you can really call it true additional content for SWTOR in any real meaningful way.  They are expanding the Star Wars IP pretty much through new games exclusively.  The plan for 2014 look pretty shallow (although, the PvP flashpoints could be really awesome).

    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. 

     Again, this is an issue of what to do post-development.  You have the game.  You've already paid development costs.  Hypothetically, let's say you developed a $2 billion dollar game that makes $200 million a year.  That's a huge failure.  However, you probably aren't going to abandon the game.  The economics of continuing a produced game and creating a game are two completely separate issues.

    A good additional example can be pulled from the movie industry.  If a company releases a movie that is under performing, they don't yank it from theaters.  They've paid for the movie.  They've spent the bulk of what they'll spend on marketing.  They let it run its course.

    This is an issue of sunk costs.

     

     

    The actual cost of the game varies by $0 because the cost is what it is.  We have estimates anywhere from $150 million to apparently $500 million by everyone from gaming insiders to investors.  The point is, you do not have those numbers.  Any number you've picked is a guess.  You can call it an estimate, but it's a guess.  That's why there is such a wide variance in the estimates on how much it costs.  A fifty million dollar variance in the estimates is still a big deal though.

     

    But again, these are all financial details, which you do not have or aren't presenting.  There are a lot of details missing from your one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game.  That's fine, because they are missing from everyone's one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game. 

     

    You are doing what all the other, non-MBA people are doing, which is mixing some economic words* with your personal opinion on aspects of the game.  In your response this would be the Lucas Arts license combined with your opinion of the new content in the game.  You have a subjective opinion, just like everyone else.  What you don't have are any objective facts to point to in order to say the game is a financial failure.  It is apparently doing pretty OK financially.  Good even.  EA says so.  If you haven't read what EA has said about SWToR, in the very say quarterly reports that don't give you any detailed information on SWToR's financials, I'm not sure what to tell you.  It's there. *shrug* 

     

    Pick something else to point at like the stock price (which is now higher than it was before SWToR released), or the ridiculous claims of two million on going subscribers.  Stuff like that.  Even there, if we're going to pick out single points in time and say the game is currently a failure because of those single points in time, then there does not exist a successful MMORPG.  This should be something you're fine with doing because you get the whole sunk costs thing.  What matters is this point in time forward.

     

    * You're using them right, btw, which is odd for the people who post here, so there is that.

     

    You have 3 different numbers that need considering:

    1) development cost

    2) budget

    3) endevour cost

    endevour cost > budget > development cost

    Aquisition of BW HAS to be factored in and a great chunk of it becasue EA wouldnt have bought BW if it hadnt start developing Star Wars MMO in the first place, and frankly, what has BW released since it was aquired by EA that can in any meaningful way justify 800m$?

    Nothing.

    And SWTOR proved to be bust (at one point even Riccitello called it "a miss" publicly)

    Guess I just shit on your parade. 

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/403331/page/1

    Give....official....EA....numbers....

    I would say the same for all the argument about it's development costs or the fact that the game itself is dying.

    EA actually have officially said that the game is "very profitable".

    image
  • DroosteelDroosteel Member Posts: 138
    Originally posted by skyline385
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by marsh9799
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    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.

     We do have some reasonable estimates.  They come from investment companies who do this for a living.  I don't think the costs vary as much as you think they do.  On the royalty, this is the figures determined by investment companies who do this for a living and how would you not expect Lucas to get a 30% royalty minimum here?  I haven't seen any statements from EA indicating the game is doing well.

    Additionally, if you look at software development in general, something this large that is developed over six years is going to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    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.

     I dealt with this elsewhere.  This is a sunk cost issue.  The development costs are front loaded and become irrelevant after the game has been released in determining whether or not the game continues running.  This is why games like the original Everquest and LOTRO are still running.  You'd never develop a game for that size player base.  Once you have developed a game already, it is operationally profitable to have a player base that size.  As a side note, a lot of people have mentioned the continued game development.  Relative to most MMOs, the additional content that has been added is extremely trivial.  Galactic Starfighter is practically a separate game.  I don't even know if you can really call it true additional content for SWTOR in any real meaningful way.  They are expanding the Star Wars IP pretty much through new games exclusively.  The plan for 2014 look pretty shallow (although, the PvP flashpoints could be really awesome).

    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. 

     Again, this is an issue of what to do post-development.  You have the game.  You've already paid development costs.  Hypothetically, let's say you developed a $2 billion dollar game that makes $200 million a year.  That's a huge failure.  However, you probably aren't going to abandon the game.  The economics of continuing a produced game and creating a game are two completely separate issues.

    A good additional example can be pulled from the movie industry.  If a company releases a movie that is under performing, they don't yank it from theaters.  They've paid for the movie.  They've spent the bulk of what they'll spend on marketing.  They let it run its course.

    This is an issue of sunk costs.

     

     

    The actual cost of the game varies by $0 because the cost is what it is.  We have estimates anywhere from $150 million to apparently $500 million by everyone from gaming insiders to investors.  The point is, you do not have those numbers.  Any number you've picked is a guess.  You can call it an estimate, but it's a guess.  That's why there is such a wide variance in the estimates on how much it costs.  A fifty million dollar variance in the estimates is still a big deal though.

     

    But again, these are all financial details, which you do not have or aren't presenting.  There are a lot of details missing from your one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game.  That's fine, because they are missing from everyone's one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game. 

     

    You are doing what all the other, non-MBA people are doing, which is mixing some economic words* with your personal opinion on aspects of the game.  In your response this would be the Lucas Arts license combined with your opinion of the new content in the game.  You have a subjective opinion, just like everyone else.  What you don't have are any objective facts to point to in order to say the game is a financial failure.  It is apparently doing pretty OK financially.  Good even.  EA says so.  If you haven't read what EA has said about SWToR, in the very say quarterly reports that don't give you any detailed information on SWToR's financials, I'm not sure what to tell you.  It's there. *shrug* 

     

    Pick something else to point at like the stock price (which is now higher than it was before SWToR released), or the ridiculous claims of two million on going subscribers.  Stuff like that.  Even there, if we're going to pick out single points in time and say the game is currently a failure because of those single points in time, then there does not exist a successful MMORPG.  This should be something you're fine with doing because you get the whole sunk costs thing.  What matters is this point in time forward.

     

    * You're using them right, btw, which is odd for the people who post here, so there is that.

     

    You have 3 different numbers that need considering:

    1) development cost

    2) budget

    3) endevour cost

    endevour cost > budget > development cost

    Aquisition of BW HAS to be factored in and a great chunk of it becasue EA wouldnt have bought BW if it hadnt start developing Star Wars MMO in the first place, and frankly, what has BW released since it was aquired by EA that can in any meaningful way justify 800m$?

    Nothing.

    And SWTOR proved to be bust (at one point even Riccitello called it "a miss" publicly)

    This is the reason why i wrote "Amrchair Economists".

    Do you even understand how big the IPs Dragon Age and Mass Effect are?

    The original Dragon Age Origins alone has sold 3.2Million Box copies. Do you understand this number? Now account into this all the DLCs as well as sequels and the upcoming game.

    All of the Mass Effect games have sold over 1.5Million Box copies each. Again add to this the DLCs and everything.

    And after all this, we will be DA:Inquisition this year which is getting hyped up as well as the next Mass Effect next year. And Bioware will be working on more IPs as long as EA exists. You can't factor out the future of a studio when you buy it. Both the short term and long term prospects are calculated.

    Yes, because every studio EA aquired grew and flourished under EA.

    rofl, dude

    Read my post once again and then try to add anything meaningful. Anything really.

    Oh, and, FYI DA:O was last BW true project, they devalued EVERY IP in BW portfolio since then (even managed to devalue Star Wars IP to where it floats around (or is beaten) by basically no name IPs rofl)

    And i wouldnt throw out  "armchair economist" that much if i were you, it might really stick with you and posts you make.

    I also reckon you didnt know Austin is no longer BW but transfered to EA? No? No bigge. Its not that important to "armchair economist"

  • skyline385skyline385 Member Posts: 564
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by skyline385
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by marsh9799
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    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.

     We do have some reasonable estimates.  They come from investment companies who do this for a living.  I don't think the costs vary as much as you think they do.  On the royalty, this is the figures determined by investment companies who do this for a living and how would you not expect Lucas to get a 30% royalty minimum here?  I haven't seen any statements from EA indicating the game is doing well.

    Additionally, if you look at software development in general, something this large that is developed over six years is going to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    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.

     I dealt with this elsewhere.  This is a sunk cost issue.  The development costs are front loaded and become irrelevant after the game has been released in determining whether or not the game continues running.  This is why games like the original Everquest and LOTRO are still running.  You'd never develop a game for that size player base.  Once you have developed a game already, it is operationally profitable to have a player base that size.  As a side note, a lot of people have mentioned the continued game development.  Relative to most MMOs, the additional content that has been added is extremely trivial.  Galactic Starfighter is practically a separate game.  I don't even know if you can really call it true additional content for SWTOR in any real meaningful way.  They are expanding the Star Wars IP pretty much through new games exclusively.  The plan for 2014 look pretty shallow (although, the PvP flashpoints could be really awesome).

    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. 

     Again, this is an issue of what to do post-development.  You have the game.  You've already paid development costs.  Hypothetically, let's say you developed a $2 billion dollar game that makes $200 million a year.  That's a huge failure.  However, you probably aren't going to abandon the game.  The economics of continuing a produced game and creating a game are two completely separate issues.

    A good additional example can be pulled from the movie industry.  If a company releases a movie that is under performing, they don't yank it from theaters.  They've paid for the movie.  They've spent the bulk of what they'll spend on marketing.  They let it run its course.

    This is an issue of sunk costs.

     

     

    The actual cost of the game varies by $0 because the cost is what it is.  We have estimates anywhere from $150 million to apparently $500 million by everyone from gaming insiders to investors.  The point is, you do not have those numbers.  Any number you've picked is a guess.  You can call it an estimate, but it's a guess.  That's why there is such a wide variance in the estimates on how much it costs.  A fifty million dollar variance in the estimates is still a big deal though.

     

    But again, these are all financial details, which you do not have or aren't presenting.  There are a lot of details missing from your one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game.  That's fine, because they are missing from everyone's one paragraph, expert financial analysis of the game. 

     

    You are doing what all the other, non-MBA people are doing, which is mixing some economic words* with your personal opinion on aspects of the game.  In your response this would be the Lucas Arts license combined with your opinion of the new content in the game.  You have a subjective opinion, just like everyone else.  What you don't have are any objective facts to point to in order to say the game is a financial failure.  It is apparently doing pretty OK financially.  Good even.  EA says so.  If you haven't read what EA has said about SWToR, in the very say quarterly reports that don't give you any detailed information on SWToR's financials, I'm not sure what to tell you.  It's there. *shrug* 

     

    Pick something else to point at like the stock price (which is now higher than it was before SWToR released), or the ridiculous claims of two million on going subscribers.  Stuff like that.  Even there, if we're going to pick out single points in time and say the game is currently a failure because of those single points in time, then there does not exist a successful MMORPG.  This should be something you're fine with doing because you get the whole sunk costs thing.  What matters is this point in time forward.

     

    * You're using them right, btw, which is odd for the people who post here, so there is that.

     

    You have 3 different numbers that need considering:

    1) development cost

    2) budget

    3) endevour cost

    endevour cost > budget > development cost

    Aquisition of BW HAS to be factored in and a great chunk of it becasue EA wouldnt have bought BW if it hadnt start developing Star Wars MMO in the first place, and frankly, what has BW released since it was aquired by EA that can in any meaningful way justify 800m$?

    Nothing.

    And SWTOR proved to be bust (at one point even Riccitello called it "a miss" publicly)

    This is the reason why i wrote "Amrchair Economists".

    Do you even understand how big the IPs Dragon Age and Mass Effect are?

    The original Dragon Age Origins alone has sold 3.2Million Box copies. Do you understand this number? Now account into this all the DLCs as well as sequels and the upcoming game.

    All of the Mass Effect games have sold over 1.5Million Box copies each. Again add to this the DLCs and everything.

    And after all this, we will be DA:Inquisition this year which is getting hyped up as well as the next Mass Effect next year. And Bioware will be working on more IPs as long as EA exists. You can't factor out the future of a studio when you buy it. Both the short term and long term prospects are calculated.

    Yes, because every studio EA aquired grew and flourished under EA.

    rofl, dude

    Read my post once again and then try to add anything meaningful. Anything really.

    Oh, and, FYI DA:O was last BW true project, they devalued EVERY IP in BW portfolio since then (even managed to devalue Star Wars IP to where it floats around (or is beaten) by basically no name IPs rofl)

    And there you go again saying things without proper sources. All the Mass Effect games have sold extremely well. Even DA 2 sold well and DA:I is getting hyped. How do you know all the Bioware IPs are devalued?

    give....proper....sources

    Also, i like how you plain ignored the box sales numbers i posted as well as the DLC sales.

    Adding "rofl" to an argument just verifies that you have ran out of valid arguments and want to try to get out by mocking someone trying to have a discussion.

    image
  • HulluckHulluck Member UncommonPosts: 839
    Originally posted by wildscore12
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by eGumball

    snip Though it is not wrong if some may love it or believe it is successful because it is all a matter of opinion. snip

     

    I pretty much agree with what you said except this part.

    This just cannot be. Because - where do you draw the line?

    "lookie i farted its biggets succes in mankind history" "WTF?" "you are a hater, its my opinion so it is SO?

    "blurp! OMG achievent of the century!" "dude it really isnt" "you hate, i said its achievement of the century and its my opinion?"

    Really, you think thats acceptable?

    Or to redefine success so even Titanic is a SUCCESS?

    Or no failure of ANY kind ever because some nut out there proclaims anythig/everything a success?

    Ill go with established standard, standard that was put in for a reason. If these people want to redefine this standard to even fit SWTOR in, theyll have to go a bit farther than (sanctioned) forum drivel.

    "Established standards" the standards we judge if Swtor is a success is to compare it to other MMORPGs.  When you do this here is what we get. 

    Swtor revenue exceeds the majority of other mmos....equals success

    Swtor is profitable...equals success

    Swtor is the 2nd or 3rd most popular western mmo out today...equals success

    Swtor has released a ton of content the last two years (go read their patch notes get comfy there is a lot to read).. Equals success 

    Swtor has provided a road map for content in 2014 continued development...equals success

     

    Those are the factors that MMORPGS are judged by to determine their success.  Swtor has succeeded in ALL of them. 

    another. EA turned around a faltering MMO which is rare.....equals success.

    I don't even play the freaking game and don't even care other than two turds refusing to be reasonable and pulling dated data and quotes but ignoring the most current data. That's what really irks me. Making random percentages as if they have the inside scoop..

  • DroosteelDroosteel Member Posts: 138
    Originally posted by wildscore12
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by eGumball

    snip Though it is not wrong if some may love it or believe it is successful because it is all a matter of opinion. snip

     

    I pretty much agree with what you said except this part.

    This just cannot be. Because - where do you draw the line?

    "lookie i farted its biggets succes in mankind history" "WTF?" "you are a hater, its my opinion so it is SO?

    "blurp! OMG achievent of the century!" "dude it really isnt" "you hate, i said its achievement of the century and its my opinion?"

    Really, you think thats acceptable?

    Or to redefine success so even Titanic is a SUCCESS?

    Or no failure of ANY kind ever because some nut out there proclaims anythig/everything a success?

    Ill go with established standard, standard that was put in for a reason. If these people want to redefine this standard to even fit SWTOR in, theyll have to go a bit farther than (sanctioned) forum drivel.

    "Established standards" the standards we judge if Swtor is a success is to compare it to other MMORPGs.  When you do this here is what we get. 

    Swtor revenue exceeds the majority of other mmos....equals success

    Swtor is profitable...equals success

    Swtor is the 2nd or 3rd most popular western mmo out today...equals success

    Swtor has released a ton of content the last two years (go read their patch notes get comfy there is a lot to read).. Equals success 

    Swtor has provided a road map for content in 2014 continued development...equals success

     

    Those are the factors that MMORPGS are judged by to determine their success.  Swtor has succeeded in ALL of them. 

    What you mean indie MMOs made in garage, maybe EvE?

    Or even better: Vanguard. Yes. Lets compare it to Vangurad rofl

    You just dont get it, do you? (i know, I know, Musco said so...)

  • HulluckHulluck Member UncommonPosts: 839
    [mod edit]

    You can take Vanguard off that list. SOE does deserve credit for saving it, though.

      When looking at the big scheme of how many have come and gone or have been put on life support by now in their life cycle where SWTOR is at this point. Yes rare. Few have actually rebounded like SWTOR is doing at this point. Get over your hate and be objective. Or keep throwing a fit telling everyone how wrong they are.  Marsh will be around to tell me how wrong this is as well I am sure http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/403331/page/1

    Not paying the bills there. no sir..

  • HulluckHulluck Member UncommonPosts: 839
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by wildscore12
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by wildscore12
    Originally posted by Droosteel

    It doesnt matter really since The Musco brigade have sanctioned trolling here just as on official boards, its pretty bad for MMORPG:COm, but hey, it didnt help the game so this wont either (if you havent noticed its games fault not people who abandoned it fault like EA want to serve you, and you cannot escape from that just prolong it a bit).

    You and Marsh have been crapping on the past few pages now with b.s. Anyone who didn't agree with either of you. You two have been shitting on. Pulling dated data ignoring current and coming up with speculation with 0 objectivity. Now you want to say you were trying to be reasonable. B.S.  suck it up buttercup. 

     

    I've publicly eaten crow on these forums when my p.o.v. was flawed.

  • skyline385skyline385 Member Posts: 564
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    Originally posted by wildscore12
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by eGumball

    snip Though it is not wrong if some may love it or believe it is successful because it is all a matter of opinion. snip

     

    I pretty much agree with what you said except this part.

    This just cannot be. Because - where do you draw the line?

    "lookie i farted its biggets succes in mankind history" "WTF?" "you are a hater, its my opinion so it is SO?

    "blurp! OMG achievent of the century!" "dude it really isnt" "you hate, i said its achievement of the century and its my opinion?"

    Really, you think thats acceptable?

    Or to redefine success so even Titanic is a SUCCESS?

    Or no failure of ANY kind ever because some nut out there proclaims anythig/everything a success?

    Ill go with established standard, standard that was put in for a reason. If these people want to redefine this standard to even fit SWTOR in, theyll have to go a bit farther than (sanctioned) forum drivel.

    "Established standards" the standards we judge if Swtor is a success is to compare it to other MMORPGs.  When you do this here is what we get. 

    Swtor revenue exceeds the majority of other mmos....equals success

    Swtor is profitable...equals success

    Swtor is the 2nd or 3rd most popular western mmo out today...equals success

    Swtor has released a ton of content the last two years (go read their patch notes get comfy there is a lot to read).. Equals success 

    Swtor has provided a road map for content in 2014 continued development...equals success

     

    Those are the factors that MMORPGS are judged by to determine their success.  Swtor has succeeded in ALL of them. 

    another. EA turned around a faltering MMO which is rare.....equals success.

    I don't even play the freaking game and don't even care other than two turds refusing to be reasonable and pulling dated data and quotes but ignoring the most current data. That's what really irks me. Making random percentages as if they have the inside scoop..

    EQ2, DDO, AoC, Vanguard, L2 west, TSW... ... ...

    Yes. rarity. All prime examples of success

    Success redefined. Mission accomplished.

    Signed: The Musco brigade

    ahahahahahahahahahahahah

    Oooh, and "most current data", well, come back when you actually have ANY current date (EA data, not random internetz numberz)

    image
  • TygranirTygranir Member Posts: 741
    Originally posted by skyline385
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    Originally posted by wildscore12
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by eGumball

    snip Though it is not wrong if some may love it or believe it is successful because it is all a matter of opinion. snip

     

    I pretty much agree with what you said except this part.

    This just cannot be. Because - where do you draw the line?

    "lookie i farted its biggets succes in mankind history" "WTF?" "you are a hater, its my opinion so it is SO?

    "blurp! OMG achievent of the century!" "dude it really isnt" "you hate, i said its achievement of the century and its my opinion?"

    Really, you think thats acceptable?

    Or to redefine success so even Titanic is a SUCCESS?

    Or no failure of ANY kind ever because some nut out there proclaims anythig/everything a success?

    Ill go with established standard, standard that was put in for a reason. If these people want to redefine this standard to even fit SWTOR in, theyll have to go a bit farther than (sanctioned) forum drivel.

    "Established standards" the standards we judge if Swtor is a success is to compare it to other MMORPGs.  When you do this here is what we get. 

    Swtor revenue exceeds the majority of other mmos....equals success

    Swtor is profitable...equals success

    Swtor is the 2nd or 3rd most popular western mmo out today...equals success

    Swtor has released a ton of content the last two years (go read their patch notes get comfy there is a lot to read).. Equals success 

    Swtor has provided a road map for content in 2014 continued development...equals success

     

    Those are the factors that MMORPGS are judged by to determine their success.  Swtor has succeeded in ALL of them. 

    another. EA turned around a faltering MMO which is rare.....equals success.

    I don't even play the freaking game and don't even care other than two turds refusing to be reasonable and pulling dated data and quotes but ignoring the most current data. That's what really irks me. Making random percentages as if they have the inside scoop..

    EQ2, DDO, AoC, Vanguard, L2 west, TSW... ... ...

    Yes. rarity. All prime examples of success

    Success redefined. Mission accomplished.

    Signed: The Musco brigade

    ahahahahahahahahahahahah

    Oooh, and "most current data", well, come back when you actually have ANY current date (EA data, not random internetz numberz)

    ^ so much win in 1 pic

    SWTOR Referral Bonus!
    Referral link
    7 day subscriber level access
    Returning players get 1 free server transfer

    Leveling assistance items given to new player!

    See all perks Here

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by Hulluck
    Originally posted by wildscore12
    Originally posted by Droosteel
    Originally posted by eGumball

    snip Though it is not wrong if some may love it or believe it is successful because it is all a matter of opinion. snip

     

    I pretty much agree with what you said except this part.

    This just cannot be. Because - where do you draw the line?

    "lookie i farted its biggets succes in mankind history" "WTF?" "you are a hater, its my opinion so it is SO?

    "blurp! OMG achievent of the century!" "dude it really isnt" "you hate, i said its achievement of the century and its my opinion?"

    Really, you think thats acceptable?

    Or to redefine success so even Titanic is a SUCCESS?

    Or no failure of ANY kind ever because some nut out there proclaims anythig/everything a success?

    Ill go with established standard, standard that was put in for a reason. If these people want to redefine this standard to even fit SWTOR in, theyll have to go a bit farther than (sanctioned) forum drivel.

    "Established standards" the standards we judge if Swtor is a success is to compare it to other MMORPGs.  When you do this here is what we get. 

    Swtor revenue exceeds the majority of other mmos....equals success

    Swtor is profitable...equals success

    Swtor is the 2nd or 3rd most popular western mmo out today...equals success

    Swtor has released a ton of content the last two years (go read their patch notes get comfy there is a lot to read).. Equals success 

    Swtor has provided a road map for content in 2014 continued development...equals success

     

    Those are the factors that MMORPGS are judged by to determine their success.  Swtor has succeeded in ALL of them. 

    another. EA turned around a faltering MMO which is rare.....equals success.

    I don't even play the freaking game and don't even care other than two turds refusing to be reasonable and pulling dated data and quotes but ignoring the most current data. That's what really irks me. Making random percentages as if they have the inside scoop..

    EQ2, DDO, AoC, Vanguard, L2 west, TSW... ... ...

    Yes. rarity. All prime examples of success

    Success redefined. Mission accomplished.

    Signed: The Musco brigade

    ahahahahahahahahahahahah

    Oooh, and "most current data", well, come back when you actually have ANY current date (EA data, not random internetz numberz)

    Yes, no Internet numbers, we only want to see pure, printed media. That's the only bastion of media truth these days. You know, because if they take the time to print it, then it's definitely true. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • AmanaAmana Moderator UncommonPosts: 3,912
    At this point, things have gone beyond a legitimate discussion of the topic into a circle of insults and back and forth fighting.

    To give feedback on moderation, contact [email protected]

This discussion has been closed.