The game has payed for it's development already and is currently turning a nice profit and so long as they don't dip below their target which was 400k they'll continue to make money on their investment.
Even if the worst case senario plays out for the game they can cut the dev team and bleed out the remaining subs and as long as they shut it down at the right time the game would still be a business success.
I'm sure they would prefer to have a successful game with all of the subscription profits that go with it but while you haters are giggling in your pants over their number losses don't forget that the game is a $ucce$$.
Reasoning like yours is why we have mediocre games.
Calling TOR a success might be a very short sighted conclusion, if you take in consideration the bad PR for EA and the BioWare brand.
Bad PR for EA? EA would have to kill kittens to make a worse name for itself. This is what EA does. They make games for profit and they've made a profit from this game and if Bioware gets hurt no big deal.
1.3 million paying customers, making it easily the second largest western MMO, is... Dying?
Because, you know, it's not like newly released MMOs typically lose subscribers after a few months.
They sold 2.3 million copies. They have 1.3 million subs.
THEY LOST 1 MILLION SUBSCRIBERS IN FOUR MONTHS....
HELLO?!
ANYONE THERE MAVERICK?!
Actually it is worse than that considering all the accounts they reactivated for their free month.
Read... then comment...
The 1.3 number is from the end of their last quarter (ended in March). The reactivation program was in April.
But it's clear that no matter what is said about this game, you only have negativity/doubt in your mind, so I somehow suspect you'll come up with another excuse...
Oh no, now it's not the #2 MMO in the West anymore!
Oh, wait, it still is.
Personally I don't understand how people can still enjoy it after the first month or so, but more power to ya if you do.
Actually, it's not. So, while EA said it, they didn't put on proof of their claims and the evidence suggests that World of Tanks has twice the unique-player log-ins of SWTOR and that League of Legends is clearly the #1 MMO in the West, having three-times the unique-logins of WoW.
Which puts SWTOR, at best, in the #4 place. Down from #3 at its peak. Plus, when it was #3, it was way ahead of WoT and the next tier behind WoT was way far away.
Now, not so much. The two nearest competitors, each at about 60% of SWTOR log-ins, are Aion and TERA.
Aion is tough to classify, however, because it's global. It, despite all of its troubles and going F2P (which NCSoft likes as a model) is still larger worldwide. But if you only go 'west' then, yes, SWTOR is bigger in the 'west.' But not globally.
Add in that TERA (just US) is just past Aion (west) and hot on SWTOR's heels... And, like Aion, if you add in world-wide... It might be larger, despite the server mergers in Korea and Japan.
Then we all those Nexon and Perfect World cash-shop games... They have TONS of players. But at this point, it'd be piling on so I'll leave it with what they said is true, if we artificially limit MMOs to Western-only markets while only counting subscription MMOs as real MMOs.
The game has payed for it's development already and is currently turning a nice profit and so long as they don't dip below their target which was 400k they'll continue to make money on their investment.
Even if the worst case senario plays out for the game they can cut the dev team and bleed out the remaining subs and as long as they shut it down at the right time the game would still be a business success.
I'm sure they would prefer to have a successful game with all of the subscription profits that go with it but while you haters are giggling in your pants over their number losses don't forget that the game is a $ucce$$.
Reasoning like yours is why we have mediocre games.
Calling TOR a success might be a very short sighted conclusion, if you take in consideration the bad PR for EA and the BioWare brand.
Bad PR for EA? EA would have to kill kittens to make a worse name for itself. This is what EA does. They make games for profit and they've made a profit from this game and if Bioware gets hurt no big deal.
Another KOTOR would not of made this much money.
Maybe, maybe not. How much money has SWTOR made so far, after expenses and development costs have been factored in?
The game has payed for it's development already and is currently turning a nice profit and so long as they don't dip below their target which was 400k they'll continue to make money on their investment.
Even if the worst case senario plays out for the game they can cut the dev team and bleed out the remaining subs and as long as they shut it down at the right time the game would still be a business success.
I'm sure they would prefer to have a successful game with all of the subscription profits that go with it but while you haters are giggling in your pants over their number losses don't forget that the game is a $ucce$$.
Reasoning like yours is why we have mediocre games.
Calling TOR a success might be a very short sighted conclusion, if you take in consideration the bad PR for EA and the BioWare brand.
Bad PR for EA? EA would have to kill kittens to make a worse name for itself. This is what EA does. They make games for profit and they've made a profit from this game and if Bioware gets hurt no big deal.
Another KOTOR would not of made this much money.
True, another KOTOR probably would not have made this much money. It also would have cost a fraction of the development costs. The percentage of profit to investment would have been much higher on another KOTOR. In fact, they probably could have made 4 more KOTORs for what they spent on SWTOR and I would bet those 4 games would have made far more net profit than SWTOR and it would require smaller amounts of capital be tied up at any one time.
A company that makes games for profit would consider all of the above important. The fact that they could not spend the $200 million they spent on SWTOR on other more profitable ventures while it was tied up in the development of SWTOR is what investors look at. Investors run EA.
1.3 million paying customers, making it easily the second largest western MMO, is... Dying?
Because, you know, it's not like newly released MMOs typically lose subscribers after a few months.
They sold 2.3 million copies. They have 1.3 million subs.
THEY LOST 1 MILLION SUBSCRIBERS IN FOUR MONTHS....
HELLO?!
ANYONE THERE MAVERICK?!
Actually it is worse than that considering all the accounts they reactivated for their free month.
Read... then comment...
The 1.3 number is from the end of their last quarter (ended in March). The reactivation program was in April.
But it's clear that no matter what is said about this game, you only have negativity/doubt in your mind, so I somehow suspect you'll come up with another excuse...
No, the notes are not gospel. They are mistated. The actual numbers are in the presented financial statement package which reads:
Electronic Arts Inc. (NASDAQ: EA) today announced preliminary financial results for its fourth fiscal quarter and fiscal year ended March 31, 2012.
"We are proud to report a strong quarter and a fiscal year highlighted with $1.2 billion of digital revenue," said Chief Executive Officer John Riccitiello. "In the coming year, we break away from the pack, with a very different profile than the traditional game companies and capabilities that none of our new digital competitors can match."
"Digital growth drove our margins in fiscal 12 and we project this trend will continue in fiscal 13," said Interim Chief Financial Officer Ken Barker. "We saw more than 20 percent non-GAAP diluted EPS growth in fiscal 12, and are guiding to more than 30 percent growth in fiscal 13 based on the midpoint of our guidance."
Selected Operating Highlights and Metrics:
*On a non-GAAP basis
Strong results driven by the successful launches of Mass Effect™ 3, FIFA Street 4, SSX™ and Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning™.
FIFA 12 established the best year in franchise history - with downloads and micro-transactions totaling $108 million*. FIFA Ultimate Team — a pure digital companion to recent FIFA titles was the second best-selling EA offering in the UK in fiscal 12.
Battlefield 3™ had a record year, establishing itself as one of EA's premiergame services and in the process successfully took sharein the growing First-Person-Shooter market.
Battlefield 3 players are still deeply engaged — 6.3 million MAUs in March. New content downloads available in May and June.
Q4 full-game downloads were up 76 percent* year-over-year, contributing $60 million* in the quarter, driven in part by Mass Effect 3 and STAR WARS®: The Old Republic™.
STAR WARS®: The Old Republic™ active subscribers are 1.3 million. Two new content packs — Legacy and Allies, available in Q1.
...
This is for the quarter and fiscal year endied March 31st, 2012. It wasn't for April. They've already put out one correction:
And the press release is meaningless. It's not GAAP, 10K, 10Q or audited financial statements. Anything it misstates (just like last quarters was misstated) is subordinate to the financial results which are covered by SEC and GAAP rules. Bottom line is that any clown can make a bad press release and let errors go through unchecked. Financials, OTOH, are gospel. And the gospel of the financials is that it's 1.3 million subs for the quarter and year ended March 31st, 2012.
So, I guess someone should be practicing what the preach. He was right. You are wrong, not because you can't read. But because you don't know what to read and what to not read. What is gospel and must be correct. What is meaningless and can contain misleading errors.
In short, you got burned by EA's lack of quality control.
The game has payed for it's development already and is currently turning a nice profit and so long as they don't dip below their target which was 400k they'll continue to make money on their investment.
Even if the worst case senario plays out for the game they can cut the dev team and bleed out the remaining subs and as long as they shut it down at the right time the game would still be a business success.
I'm sure they would prefer to have a successful game with all of the subscription profits that go with it but while you haters are giggling in your pants over their number losses don't forget that the game is a $ucce$$.
It would not have even remotley come close to paying its development costs let alone its on goings.
People seem to forget interest on investor loans, the IP from Lucas, the hero engine, tax, dev staff, customer service staff, web development staff, community managers, middle management, finance staff servers, bandwidth, real estate, utilities and on and on the list goes.
Interest,tax and the IP license alone would of eaten the entire launch box sales.
They also forget that the retail chain takes half the money up. EA, according to their figures, sells 67% of this game at wholesale. They don't get one-half of 67% of the gross revenue. And Lucas Arts, the PUBLISHER, takes 30% of every thing Star Wars. From Jelly Beans to the SWG license, to phony lightsabers. I doubt SWTOR is any different.
So, post Lucas Arts, they get 70% of Origin store and 35% of retail (70% of 50%). That $150 million revenue stream from 2.4 million box sales, by the time it gets to EA... $35 million from the Origin store. Another $35 million from the retailers.
You've now got $70 million in your pocket. For a $200 million (minimum) game. You're not profitable. You haven't even covered development costs.
Then the marketing. Wow, the marketing campaign was huge. Ricetello said BF3's was $50 million. I've read media experts who say SWTOR's is broader in scope, but less expensive since it was mostly post-holiday. With estimates anywhere from $35 million to $50 million. And considering EA's marketing went up close to $100 million last year thanks to the impact of BF3, SWTOR and ME3 on marketing... I believe those estimates.
There is a reason the average fortune 500 company, over the past 40 years, has had an annual average profit margin of 5%. Things cost money to make. They cost money to operate. Other people get a piece of your pie.
Games are no different. There is no special magic that all the money gets to the developer.
And yet people who clearly don't understand business or accouting tell us the game is profitable. It's clearly not even close at this point.
The game has payed for it's development already and is currently turning a nice profit and so long as they don't dip below their target which was 400k they'll continue to make money on their investment.
Even if the worst case senario plays out for the game they can cut the dev team and bleed out the remaining subs and as long as they shut it down at the right time the game would still be a business success.
I'm sure they would prefer to have a successful game with all of the subscription profits that go with it but while you haters are giggling in your pants over their number losses don't forget that the game is a $ucce$$.
It would not have even remotley come close to paying its development costs let alone its on goings.
People seem to forget interest on investor loans, the IP from Lucas, the hero engine, tax, dev staff, customer service staff, web development staff, community managers, middle management, finance staff servers, bandwidth, real estate, utilities and on and on the list goes.
Interest,tax and the IP license alone would of eaten the entire launch box sales.
So true, the other day I drove by EA's HQ and they were running a car wash to make extra money so they could make a game. Interest on investment loans - that's cute.
The staff aren't making much money at all - it's actually a joke just how much crap those people take from us gamers for the amount of money they earn.
Have you ever wondered why all these game companies seem to gravitate to specific cities?
Trust me, Eaware, Lucas Arts are extremely lucky that Star Wars fans will stand by even sloppily done products. Otherwise it would have been even worse.
Most of you are delusional. Here is an example from the beginning of February: Can I get the next winning lottery numbers from all of you gurus?
Originally posted by Teala 2/3/12
There is no way in hell they retained 85% of their playbase. I'd bet mylife on that. In fact I'd bet right - today as of now, this game has more like 1.2 million subs and has lost upwards of 750k since release. That means they have seen 45% loss in players since the games release.
Tag this...and in 2 months we'll come back to these words I typed, because I am about to make another prediction. I predict within 2 more months this game is going to be nearing 500k subs.
Lol. He hit it almost pefectly.
Through the end of February, they sold 2.1 million copies. They sold another 100K in March. Vitually all the copies sold in March could not drop.
So, 1.3 million 'subs' on March 31st. Of which 100K are forced (March) We take those out. That gives us (maximum) 1.2 million voluntary resubscribers. (That's actually a bit overstated, btw. It's closer to 1.05 million, but I don't feel like arguing the point).
So, 2.1 million less 1.2 million = 900K dropping.
900K/2100K = 42.86% drop rate from the population that had a choice to renew or leave. And that's the minimum. It's probably worse because anyone who activated after January 4th with a time card could not drop until April.
He was damn good. You, OTOH, are the one with issues.
Comments
u have to realize majority of ppl left in the month of April so the sub is not gonna hang around 1.3 M.
Bad PR for EA? EA would have to kill kittens to make a worse name for itself. This is what EA does. They make games for profit and they've made a profit from this game and if Bioware gets hurt no big deal.
Another KOTOR would not of made this much money.
You might want to read yourself before telling others to do so. The number is as of the end of April. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ERTS/1675578999x0x566984/c10f605c-3487-488e-ad86-b5bb74fe2408/Q4_FY12_Script.pdf
___________________________
Have flask; will travel.
Actually, it's not. So, while EA said it, they didn't put on proof of their claims and the evidence suggests that World of Tanks has twice the unique-player log-ins of SWTOR and that League of Legends is clearly the #1 MMO in the West, having three-times the unique-logins of WoW.
Which puts SWTOR, at best, in the #4 place. Down from #3 at its peak. Plus, when it was #3, it was way ahead of WoT and the next tier behind WoT was way far away.
Now, not so much. The two nearest competitors, each at about 60% of SWTOR log-ins, are Aion and TERA.
Aion is tough to classify, however, because it's global. It, despite all of its troubles and going F2P (which NCSoft likes as a model) is still larger worldwide. But if you only go 'west' then, yes, SWTOR is bigger in the 'west.' But not globally.
Add in that TERA (just US) is just past Aion (west) and hot on SWTOR's heels... And, like Aion, if you add in world-wide... It might be larger, despite the server mergers in Korea and Japan.
Then we all those Nexon and Perfect World cash-shop games... They have TONS of players. But at this point, it'd be piling on so I'll leave it with what they said is true, if we artificially limit MMOs to Western-only markets while only counting subscription MMOs as real MMOs.
Maybe, maybe not. How much money has SWTOR made so far, after expenses and development costs have been factored in?
True, another KOTOR probably would not have made this much money. It also would have cost a fraction of the development costs. The percentage of profit to investment would have been much higher on another KOTOR. In fact, they probably could have made 4 more KOTORs for what they spent on SWTOR and I would bet those 4 games would have made far more net profit than SWTOR and it would require smaller amounts of capital be tied up at any one time.
A company that makes games for profit would consider all of the above important. The fact that they could not spend the $200 million they spent on SWTOR on other more profitable ventures while it was tied up in the development of SWTOR is what investors look at. Investors run EA.
No, the notes are not gospel. They are mistated. The actual numbers are in the presented financial statement package which reads:
Electronic Arts Inc. (NASDAQ: EA) today announced preliminary financial results for its fourth fiscal quarter and fiscal year ended March 31, 2012.
"We are proud to report a strong quarter and a fiscal year highlighted with $1.2 billion of digital revenue," said Chief Executive Officer John Riccitiello. "In the coming year, we break away from the pack, with a very different profile than the traditional game companies and capabilities that none of our new digital competitors can match."
"Digital growth drove our margins in fiscal 12 and we project this trend will continue in fiscal 13," said Interim Chief Financial Officer Ken Barker. "We saw more than 20 percent non-GAAP diluted EPS growth in fiscal 12, and are guiding to more than 30 percent growth in fiscal 13 based on the midpoint of our guidance."
Selected Operating Highlights and Metrics:
*On a non-GAAP basis
Strong results driven by the successful launches of Mass Effect™ 3, FIFA Street 4, SSX™ and Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning™.
FIFA 12 established the best year in franchise history - with downloads and micro-transactions totaling $108 million*. FIFA Ultimate Team — a pure digital companion to recent FIFA titles was the second best-selling EA offering in the UK in fiscal 12.
Battlefield 3™ had a record year, establishing itself as one of EA's premier game services and in the process successfully took share in the growing First-Person-Shooter market.
Battlefield 3 players are still deeply engaged — 6.3 million MAUs in March. New content downloads available in May and June.
Q4 full-game downloads were up 76 percent* year-over-year, contributing $60 million* in the quarter, driven in part by Mass Effect 3 and STAR WARS®: The Old Republic™.
STAR WARS®: The Old Republic™ active subscribers are 1.3 million. Two new content packs — Legacy and Allies, available in Q1.
...
This is for the quarter and fiscal year endied March 31st, 2012. It wasn't for April. They've already put out one correction:
And the press release is meaningless. It's not GAAP, 10K, 10Q or audited financial statements. Anything it misstates (just like last quarters was misstated) is subordinate to the financial results which are covered by SEC and GAAP rules. Bottom line is that any clown can make a bad press release and let errors go through unchecked. Financials, OTOH, are gospel. And the gospel of the financials is that it's 1.3 million subs for the quarter and year ended March 31st, 2012.
So, I guess someone should be practicing what the preach. He was right. You are wrong, not because you can't read. But because you don't know what to read and what to not read. What is gospel and must be correct. What is meaningless and can contain misleading errors.
In short, you got burned by EA's lack of quality control.
They also forget that the retail chain takes half the money up. EA, according to their figures, sells 67% of this game at wholesale. They don't get one-half of 67% of the gross revenue. And Lucas Arts, the PUBLISHER, takes 30% of every thing Star Wars. From Jelly Beans to the SWG license, to phony lightsabers. I doubt SWTOR is any different.
So, post Lucas Arts, they get 70% of Origin store and 35% of retail (70% of 50%). That $150 million revenue stream from 2.4 million box sales, by the time it gets to EA... $35 million from the Origin store. Another $35 million from the retailers.
You've now got $70 million in your pocket. For a $200 million (minimum) game. You're not profitable. You haven't even covered development costs.
Then the marketing. Wow, the marketing campaign was huge. Ricetello said BF3's was $50 million. I've read media experts who say SWTOR's is broader in scope, but less expensive since it was mostly post-holiday. With estimates anywhere from $35 million to $50 million. And considering EA's marketing went up close to $100 million last year thanks to the impact of BF3, SWTOR and ME3 on marketing... I believe those estimates.
There is a reason the average fortune 500 company, over the past 40 years, has had an annual average profit margin of 5%. Things cost money to make. They cost money to operate. Other people get a piece of your pie.
Games are no different. There is no special magic that all the money gets to the developer.
And yet people who clearly don't understand business or accouting tell us the game is profitable. It's clearly not even close at this point.
So true, the other day I drove by EA's HQ and they were running a car wash to make extra money so they could make a game. Interest on investment loans - that's cute.
The staff aren't making much money at all - it's actually a joke just how much crap those people take from us gamers for the amount of money they earn.
Have you ever wondered why all these game companies seem to gravitate to specific cities?
Trust me, Eaware, Lucas Arts are extremely lucky that Star Wars fans will stand by even sloppily done products. Otherwise it would have been even worse.
Lol. He hit it almost pefectly.
Through the end of February, they sold 2.1 million copies. They sold another 100K in March. Vitually all the copies sold in March could not drop.
So, 1.3 million 'subs' on March 31st. Of which 100K are forced (March) We take those out. That gives us (maximum) 1.2 million voluntary resubscribers. (That's actually a bit overstated, btw. It's closer to 1.05 million, but I don't feel like arguing the point).
So, 2.1 million less 1.2 million = 900K dropping.
900K/2100K = 42.86% drop rate from the population that had a choice to renew or leave. And that's the minimum. It's probably worse because anyone who activated after January 4th with a time card could not drop until April.
He was damn good. You, OTOH, are the one with issues.