My how far journalism has fallen. No facts, merely rumor posited as truth. Lazy. This is Forbes?!
Aye but alot of posters here have been genuinely suckered into believing the guy is a bona fide journo for Forbes and not just some shmuck with a blog.
Nah not really. its more forbes is a site that generates a buttload of traffic (far more than here) and deals with it from a slightly different perspective (more from the economics and business side as opposed to the gaming side heavy.)
I don't see where it's huge bias. Two of EA's biggest properties recently tried going toe to toe with Activision and lost. Even if they had successful numbers, they lost in the fight that matters. Whatever TOR cost, everyone agrees this was expensive as hell, and you don't spend that kind of money to do RIFT like numbers. (Not a slam on RIFT, but their budget is a ton smaller.) They were looking to make a splash. If not dethrone or compete with WoW, at least make a serious presence and carve out a huge peice of land in MMOville. That didn't happen. They don't even have 1/10 of WoW's numbers (still stuns me whenever I write that), and they have only marginally more numbers than people who didn't even spend 1/10 of what they did. Is TOR a failure? Maybe not, but don't try to act like this was a surefire success.
The Mass Effect fiasco was a PR nightmare.
Are these kind of things the sole decider in stock prices? Of course not. But they do have an impact.
Never read a more biased article in my life. It's obvious hes an EA hater.
Battlefield 3 did very well considering it is the 1st one that was on all platforms at release. Console gamers didn't even know what Battlefield 1 and 2 were about it was a PC FPS for the most part.
Also if activision is doing so great why is the majority stock holder who owns 61% of it selling it ?
Indeed, Battlefield 3 did very well.
So well that Dice is already developing BF 4... 1 year layer.
Get ready to buy the same game every year, the new COD with yearly releases, only that now EA will drive it to the ground and kill another great franchise, because unlike Activision, they really don't know what they are doing.
It's an article in Forbes... ea hater? seriously?
Just because its on forbes means nothing. Everyone is capable of being biased real writers are able to be unbiased this one obviously is not.
It's not Bias if he is basing his comments on fact,
So him assuming swtor cost 500m to make is fact ? When every other expert says it wasn't even half of that ? I don't even play swtor anymore , but that article is about as biased as you can get. No one ever said BF was going to compete with COD. He is comparing Activision to EA in games that only show activision is better. I.E BIASED if you cannot see this you're a tool. How about we compare how many copies of madden EA sells every year ? Or NHL, Fifa, NBA franchises. The dude is a moron if he thinks SWTOR will make or break EA sure it won't be good, but in the grand scheme of things it will not have a huge impact on EAs ability to develop games. He didn't even mention that diablo 3 is a failure and despite people buying it no one is left playing it.
He wouldnt mention cod or diablo 3 in detail because this was an EA Article.
He also stated that swtor probably cost 200-300 million and that marketing expenses after that mounted to a total of 500 million, for example do you think a superbowl advert is free? Not to mention what they have to pay LA.
EA are in trouble their share price is terrible they are voted worst company of america, this does have a huge impact on their ability to develop games. If I was a top notch designer or coder the last place I'd look to work is EA infact Id rather jack that all in and work as a deputy manager at starbucks.
A SB ad is 10000 times what a normal TV ad cost. You do not spend 200mil on development and 300m on marketing are you serious ? Do you really think marketing cost that much ? Its not cheap but it in no way comes close to half of what development cost let alone 50% more. EA being voted the worst company lol like that matters. Did you vote ? No Did I vote ? No especially in a poll where you don't even know who voted or the demographic of who voted on it.
When you compare games to each other you have to talk about BOTH games not be BIASED and only point out the flaws in one of them. If Activision is so great why are they being sold ?
Okay, so the game costs 250m (between 200 and 300, pure theorycrafting.)
To this day, I visit the political blog Hot Air and I see advertisment for the game. They launched a carpetbombing marketing campaign, easily one of the largest in gaming history. That doesn't come cheap. And they've been doing these for roughly 6 months before launch. So well over a year, combined with the Super Bowl ad, and yes, 200 mill on marketing becomes at least possible, if not necessarily plausible.
As far as EA being voted the worst company, it doesn't matter how much of it is BS or not. What matters is that it occured, and it went viral. It's a PR nightmare when you have to issue press releases on why you aren't the worst company in America. You've lost the narrative at that point.
What he wrote was pretty standard and conventional stuff. Deny it if you want, but so far, your doing a pretty poor job of spinning it.
EA - soon going to be the Lehmann Brothers of gaming...
Oh and just for the record towards everyone who flamed us who said SWTOR cost $200 million: Forbes even assumes $500M (including advertising). lol. Just lol.
"SWTOR might end up going free-to-play like so many other of World of Warcraft’s competition, but that’s not the model that’s going to earn them their money back. They really needed the monthly fee model to work, and the fact that it hasn’t makes the game a failure, no matter how many players a free-to-play switch may bring back."
In the immortal words of Yoda: This is why you fail.
If SWTOR honestly did cost half a billion dollars to make, I mean REALLY, somebody was suckered and somebody is hiding in Cuba spending laundryed money right now. I would not only be firing people I would be having a full blown internal investigation with the police looking to put away a lot of people for the criminal misuse of corporate funds. It's an inexcusable disaster at that level of funding. But that's a big IF and I am not sure we will ever get the real scoop.
Except I honestly believe it. They had way the infrastructure for a 5 million subscriber game. That isn't cheap. Instead they have 1 million (that's being optimistic.)
Voiceactors for as much dialogue as they did aren't cheap.
The development cycle of TOR was bloated, and those costs just kept increasing.
Then you have the insanely massive marketing push for TOR even 6 months before launch. Then when the numbers started going south, EA responded with the largest MMO marketing campaign ever.
Then you just pile on good ol inefficiency, the kind that occurs with an absurdly large public company where it really just is the cost of doing business.
This project was absurdly bloated. 500 million might be a bit on the high side. But 400 million is easily believable, and once we are at that point, the narrative is established. Now we are just haggling.
I still don't see how this article is any less legitimate.
As long as you are comfortable with your blind folders, any babble that suits your case will seem legitimate...
Interesting... you went from a false claim (the article not being relevant to Forbes) to semantics (not like the other true economic articles) and now to insults (blind folders, babble, etc)... how quaint.
I'll take this to mean you have run out of excuses and concede the point
Remember, he also said he could produce source numbers to back him up, but that wasn't the point. Of course proving yourself isn't!
"We've been testing the game aggressively for quite a long time... and the focus for us as we head towards launch is on security, stability, saleability and retention," he said.
Muzyka continued: "There are ten of millions, tens of tens of millions of potential consumers for this game because Star Wars is the biggest IP in the world and that's a factor that can't be underestimated."
"I have tremendous respect for the folks at Blizzard, but I think we're building a product that will more than compete."
If those words were not meant to be a serious threat, then what exactly would be?
Last for the night but....
Why on earth does anyone try to deny this point? Bioware wasn't looking to just occupy a small niche here with TOR. They were taking a huge IP, they were at that time the Golden Boy of gaming, and they had EA's financial muscle behind them. And they were going for just a million subscribers?
As the great Western Philosopher Xzibit said: B***h Please
"We've been testing the game aggressively for quite a long time... and the focus for us as we head towards launch is on security, stability, saleability and retention," he said.
Muzyka continued: "There are ten of millions, tens of tens of millions of potential consumers for this game because Star Wars is the biggest IP in the world and that's a factor that can't be underestimated."
"I have tremendous respect for the folks at Blizzard, but I think we're building a product that will more than compete."
If those words were not meant to be a serious threat, then what exactly would be?
Last for the night but....
Why on earth does anyone try to deny this point? Bioware wasn't looking to just occupy a small niche here with TOR. They were taking a huge IP, they were at that time the Golden Boy of gaming, and they had EA's financial muscle behind them. And they were going for just a million subscribers?
As the great Western Philosopher Xzibit said: B***h Please
Ssssh. Falling on deaf ears. Just let it go.
Though I will say, years ago it COULD have competed with WoW. But by now not only have people had enough of that gameplay, but people that have been with that game for years aren't in it for the game anymore, they're there because of the community they have become a part of. That is far less easy to replace in a game, and the primary reason why it's stupid to try and steal those customers. Ignore them. Better to do your own thing and aim for a realistic goal. But whatever.
Where dat dead horse at?
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
"We've been testing the game aggressively for quite a long time... and the focus for us as we head towards launch is on security, stability, saleability and retention," he said.
Muzyka continued: "There are ten of millions, tens of tens of millions of potential consumers for this game because Star Wars is the biggest IP in the world and that's a factor that can't be underestimated."
"I have tremendous respect for the folks at Blizzard, but I think we're building a product that will more than compete."
If those words were not meant to be a serious threat, then what exactly would be?
Last for the night but....
Why on earth does anyone try to deny this point? Bioware wasn't looking to just occupy a small niche here with TOR. They were taking a huge IP, they were at that time the Golden Boy of gaming, and they had EA's financial muscle behind them. And they were going for just a million subscribers?
As the great Western Philosopher Xzibit said: B***h Please
This. x1000
No matter if the game is great for "you" , no matter if it does or has broke even or even made a small profit , it's a failure in what EA wanted it to be profit wise. It's wasted potential of what it could have been makes it the biggest flop so far in the AAA mmorpg market.
Comments
Nah not really. its more forbes is a site that generates a buttload of traffic (far more than here) and deals with it from a slightly different perspective (more from the economics and business side as opposed to the gaming side heavy.)
I don't see where it's huge bias. Two of EA's biggest properties recently tried going toe to toe with Activision and lost. Even if they had successful numbers, they lost in the fight that matters. Whatever TOR cost, everyone agrees this was expensive as hell, and you don't spend that kind of money to do RIFT like numbers. (Not a slam on RIFT, but their budget is a ton smaller.) They were looking to make a splash. If not dethrone or compete with WoW, at least make a serious presence and carve out a huge peice of land in MMOville. That didn't happen. They don't even have 1/10 of WoW's numbers (still stuns me whenever I write that), and they have only marginally more numbers than people who didn't even spend 1/10 of what they did. Is TOR a failure? Maybe not, but don't try to act like this was a surefire success.
The Mass Effect fiasco was a PR nightmare.
Are these kind of things the sole decider in stock prices? Of course not. But they do have an impact.
Okay, so the game costs 250m (between 200 and 300, pure theorycrafting.)
To this day, I visit the political blog Hot Air and I see advertisment for the game. They launched a carpetbombing marketing campaign, easily one of the largest in gaming history. That doesn't come cheap. And they've been doing these for roughly 6 months before launch. So well over a year, combined with the Super Bowl ad, and yes, 200 mill on marketing becomes at least possible, if not necessarily plausible.
As far as EA being voted the worst company, it doesn't matter how much of it is BS or not. What matters is that it occured, and it went viral. It's a PR nightmare when you have to issue press releases on why you aren't the worst company in America. You've lost the narrative at that point.
What he wrote was pretty standard and conventional stuff. Deny it if you want, but so far, your doing a pretty poor job of spinning it.
Except I honestly believe it. They had way the infrastructure for a 5 million subscriber game. That isn't cheap. Instead they have 1 million (that's being optimistic.)
Voiceactors for as much dialogue as they did aren't cheap.
The development cycle of TOR was bloated, and those costs just kept increasing.
Then you have the insanely massive marketing push for TOR even 6 months before launch. Then when the numbers started going south, EA responded with the largest MMO marketing campaign ever.
Then you just pile on good ol inefficiency, the kind that occurs with an absurdly large public company where it really just is the cost of doing business.
This project was absurdly bloated. 500 million might be a bit on the high side. But 400 million is easily believable, and once we are at that point, the narrative is established. Now we are just haggling.
Remember, he also said he could produce source numbers to back him up, but that wasn't the point. Of course proving yourself isn't!
Last for the night but....
Why on earth does anyone try to deny this point? Bioware wasn't looking to just occupy a small niche here with TOR. They were taking a huge IP, they were at that time the Golden Boy of gaming, and they had EA's financial muscle behind them. And they were going for just a million subscribers?
As the great Western Philosopher Xzibit said: B***h Please
Ssssh. Falling on deaf ears. Just let it go.
Though I will say, years ago it COULD have competed with WoW. But by now not only have people had enough of that gameplay, but people that have been with that game for years aren't in it for the game anymore, they're there because of the community they have become a part of. That is far less easy to replace in a game, and the primary reason why it's stupid to try and steal those customers. Ignore them. Better to do your own thing and aim for a realistic goal. But whatever.
Where dat dead horse at?
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
This. x1000
No matter if the game is great for "you" , no matter if it does or has broke even or even made a small profit , it's a failure in what EA wanted it to be profit wise. It's wasted potential of what it could have been makes it the biggest flop so far in the AAA mmorpg market.
[mod edit]
Yeah, because no developer says about their game it will be the best game ever made.
If that is all you have, I think my point stands...