Surely there have been some other crashes aswell, tabula, Aoc and warhammer to mention some of them. But this must be the biggest one when it comes to invested money! Not to mention the hype!
Have we already forgotten about Final Fantasy 14? I mean, SWTOR, to my knowledge, was at least PLAYABLE -WHEN you broke through the Ques ((Cept PVP)).
Also, Chronicles of Spellborn. Game up!...Game down...uhm....game gone...whereisgame? lol
Not contending for the title of worst ever, but they both had me kicking myself in the ass for burning the cash on them.
I liked Spellborn alot, it just really never got ... finished because Acclaim sucked so badly. I also think that Shadowbane was the victim of a bad release and rushed deleivery more than it was a bad game. SWTOR is different because they had no problems with money or production costs yet still decided to push the game out early, even worse to me is that even if the game had come out bug free and playable .. which it still is not, on release it would still be boring as hell. I at least had fun on Spellborn after my 23rd log in attempt. EA is the ONLY thing keeping SWTOR afloat right now, any other company could not afford the money loss to keep it on life support. SWTOR deserves to die but just hasn't yet, much like a few other WOW clones like WAR, LOTR, AOC, that all should be dead but continue to plauge us, I call them Zombie MMORPGS and gladly put SWTOR on that list of undead necro games.
Also Shadowbane didnt have the user base but it did last longer as a PTP title, it also didnt bankrupt UBIsoft.
Originally posted by iceman00 So on what evidence do you present that it has stabilized, when the past 7 months have been nothing but a freakin nosedive?
I am not presenting anything, I am asking for back up for claims of those who do, or rather point out their lack of...
Originally posted by iceman00 Wait....Where did you see "substantially profitable" at 500k. 500k was the break even point, not the substantially profitable.And we've linked this stuff a thousand times where the founders of Bioware viewed TOR as going to compete with WoW and be the next big thing in the industry.
Depends on source and definition of break even point. One link is just couple posts above.
Link it 1001st time then, I have never seen it ever apart from usual stuff like "it will be the greatest game ever".
Surely there have been some other crashes aswell, tabula, Aoc and warhammer to mention some of them. But this must be the biggest one when it comes to invested money! Not to mention the hype!
Certainly not SW:TOR. I'd say one of the following:-
1) Auto Assault
2) Wish (didn't even make it out of beta)
3) APB (not Reloaded)
4) FF XIV
Leaning heavily towards (4).
Consider how much money SWTOR cost to produce and develop (at least $200mil), the cast of voice actors hired to do the voice overs and the names behind the game (Bioware, EA, Star Wars) and you're telling us that 1-4 were a bigger failure? I think not my friend.
There have certainly been other failures in the mmo genre, but by far I would consider SWTOR to be biggest failure of them all. Just my opinion of course :-)
Originally posted by sammandar Consider how much money SWTOR cost to produce and develop (at least $200mil), the cast of voice actors hired to do the voice overs and the names behind the game (Bioware, EA, Star Wars)
So despite losing same money, the business is more fail if it has a brand on it strapped on?
Does your logic apply to success as well? Do you consider products of unknown brands to be more or less successful than well branded products?
Also, I am lost how voice actors got into your train of thoughts completely...
Consider how much money SWTOR cost to produce and develop (at least $200mil), the cast of voice actors hired to do the voice overs and the names behind the game (Bioware, EA, Star Wars)
So despite losing same money, the business is more fail if it has a brand on it strapped on?
Does your logic apply to success as well? Do you consider products of unknown brands to be more or less successful than well branded products?
Also, I am lost how voice actors got into your train of thoughts completely...
But that's the thing, they didn't just lose some money, they lost and are still losing tons of money. I don't think anyone other than Bio/EA execs know exactly how much money they've lost, but I'm certain it is no small change.
What's that saying: "The higher you go the harder the fall"? In the case of SWTOR, we're not talking about some small budget no-name gaming company; we're talking about one of the heavy weights in the industry. It is "more fail" because of the name. If I made a movie that tanked, would you care? (no), but if George Lucas or Steven Spielberg made a movie that tanked, people would be talking about it for months, maybe even years!
The name always matters.
P.S. Think of what people will say about GW2 if it fails compared to if EoC fails...
Originally posted by sammandarBut that's the thing, they didn't just lose some money, they lost and are still losing tons of money. I don't think anyone other than Bio/EA execs know exactly how much money they've lost, but I'm certain it is no small change.
Ah, so even EA top management does not know but you do... I think that explains it.
Also do I get it right that "failure" is measured in how much people talk about it?
But that's the thing, they didn't just lose some money, they lost and are still losing tons of money. I don't think anyone other than Bio/EA execs know exactly how much money they've lost, but I'm certain it is no small change.
Ah, so even EA top management does not know but you do... I think that explains it. Also do I get it right that "failure" is measured in how much people talk about it? I think I got it already...
You misunderstand what I mean. Failure is obviously measured on how bad something does; of course, failure is subjective. Some would argue that Tabula Rasa was a bigger failure than SWTOR, yet we we most certainly know that SWTOR lost much more money than TR ever did; however, TR is no longer available for play, SWTOR still is (key word "still"). TR was also P2P before it went to F2P before it went "adios"... will the same happen to SWTOR, only time will tell.
Having said all that, SWTOR is by far the biggest failure in the mmo industry. It never met any of it's objectives (Bio/EA kept having to redifine what they were aiming for) and who knows how much further it will fall... we'll see.
But that's the thing, they didn't just lose some money, they lost and are still losing tons of money. I don't think anyone other than Bio/EA execs know exactly how much money they've lost, but I'm certain it is no small change.
Ah, so even EA top management does not know but you do... I think that explains it. Also do I get it right that "failure" is measured in how much people talk about it? I think I got it already...
You misunderstand what I mean. Failure is obviously measured on how bad something does; of course, failure is subjective. Some would argue that Tabula Rasa was a bigger failure than SWTOR, yet we we most certainly know that SWTOR lost much more money than TR ever did; however, TR is no longer available for play, SWTOR still is (key word "still"). TR was also P2P before it went to F2P before it went "adios"... will the same happen to SWTOR, only time will tell.
Having said all that, SWTOR is by far the biggest failure in the mmo industry. It never met any of it's objectives (Bio/EA kept having to redifine what they were aiming for) and who knows how much further it will fall... we'll see.
But SWToR isn't losing money. They are not making as much as projected. They aren't making as much as last month. They aren't making as much as the first month.
But they are not losing money.
The income is positive atm. They have sub money coming in, and still even some box sales coming in, so that is positive income. The fact that they have laid off so many workers also shows that they made sure they could meet not only their expenses, but maintain their profit margin.
So, I'm not sure where SWToR ever 'lost' money. I see SWToR as completely missing the mark on 'how much' would be made.
But that's the thing, they didn't just lose some money, they lost and are still losing tons of money. I don't think anyone other than Bio/EA execs know exactly how much money they've lost, but I'm certain it is no small change.
Ah, so even EA top management does not know but you do... I think that explains it. Also do I get it right that "failure" is measured in how much people talk about it? I think I got it already...
You misunderstand what I mean. Failure is obviously measured on how bad something does; of course, failure is subjective. Some would argue that Tabula Rasa was a bigger failure than SWTOR, yet we we most certainly know that SWTOR lost much more money than TR ever did; however, TR is no longer available for play, SWTOR still is (key word "still"). TR was also P2P before it went to F2P before it went "adios"... will the same happen to SWTOR, only time will tell.
Having said all that, SWTOR is by far the biggest failure in the mmo industry. It never met any of it's objectives (Bio/EA kept having to redifine what they were aiming for) and who knows how much further it will fall... we'll see.
But SWToR isn't losing money. They are not making as much as projected. They aren't making as much as last month. They aren't making as much as the first month.
But they are not losing money.
The income is positive atm. They have sub money coming in, and still even some box sales coming in, so that is positive income. The fact that they have laid off so many workers also shows that they made sure they could meet not only their expenses, but maintain their profit margin.
So, I'm not sure where SWToR ever 'lost' money. I see SWToR as completely missing the mark on 'how much' would be made.
EA has been losing money since Q3 (Feb 1st 2012); and this is before SWTOR going F2P. It will be interesting to see EA's Q4 numbers.
What I failed to clarify is that by SWTOR I meant EA (Bio/EA).
The result that occurs when expenses exceed the income or total revenue produced for a given period of time. For tax purposes, net losses in one time period can be used to counteract the income/gains generated in another time period. Under tax law, this loss can be carried back as far as two years.
Also referred to as a net operating loss (NOL).
Investopedia explains 'Net Loss'
A person or company with a net loss has not made a profit for a given year. Newer businesses often run at a net loss for the first few years, while acquiring one-time high cost expenses such as equipment, buildings, technology and rights. Businesses that have a net loss don't necessarily go bankrupt because they may opt to use their retained earnings or loans in order to stay afloat. This strategy, however, is only short term, as a company without profits cannot continue surviving for a long period of time.
Who would've thought defining "failure" would be so incredibly complicated?
Just years of forum experience...heh.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Eh...unfortunately for you, I can put those terms into a context that is slipping you.
Reported net loss is just due deferred revenue.
ie.
When I sell you a car, I will be reporting net loss due my expenses I have for the time and work needed for it's manufacturing. Once I receive your money, my deferred revenue will be recognized as earnings.
Eh...unfortunately for you, I can put those terms into a context that is slipping you.
Reported net loss is just due deferred revenue.
ie.
When I sell you a car, I will be reporting net loss due my expenses I have for the time and work needed for it's manufacturing. Once I receive your money, my deferred revenue will be recognized as earnings.
I guess that means that SWTOR's failure is even more of a serious matter; being the only sub based game post Q3. If EA reported a net loss of $205 million on Q3, with SWTOR failing as it did, I wonder how much of a net loss will they report on Q4.
As to your analogy, that's if the "deferred revenue" arrives and is large enough to off-set the continual expenses which will carry on to Q4. Deferred revenue only works in the case of one-time expenses, as in starting a business, not continual expenses, as in running a business; big difference.
These games were meant to be the next big thing/ wow-killer.
Shadowbane
Fury
Tabula Rasa
Dungeon Runners
Chronicles of Spellborne
These games are not even playable anymore
Hellgate London (don't know anything about this game)
Uh, and wait EQ2 was the second part of the most successful MMO of its time, but somehow lost to a game made by a company that knew nothing about MMOs?
Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need.
But that's the thing, they didn't just lose some money, they lost and are still losing tons of money. I don't think anyone other than Bio/EA execs know exactly how much money they've lost, but I'm certain it is no small change.
Ah, so even EA top management does not know but you do... I think that explains it. Also do I get it right that "failure" is measured in how much people talk about it? I think I got it already...
You misunderstand what I mean. Failure is obviously measured on how bad something does; of course, failure is subjective. Some would argue that Tabula Rasa was a bigger failure than SWTOR, yet we we most certainly know that SWTOR lost much more money than TR ever did; however, TR is no longer available for play, SWTOR still is (key word "still"). TR was also P2P before it went to F2P before it went "adios"... will the same happen to SWTOR, only time will tell.
Having said all that, SWTOR is by far the biggest failure in the mmo industry. It never met any of it's objectives (Bio/EA kept having to redifine what they were aiming for) and who knows how much further it will fall... we'll see.
But SWToR isn't losing money. They are not making as much as projected. They aren't making as much as last month. They aren't making as much as the first month.
But they are not losing money.
The income is positive atm. They have sub money coming in, and still even some box sales coming in, so that is positive income. The fact that they have laid off so many workers also shows that they made sure they could meet not only their expenses, but maintain their profit margin.
So, I'm not sure where SWToR ever 'lost' money. I see SWToR as completely missing the mark on 'how much' would be made.
It may be making some money at the moment, but I do not see it happening after this month when peoples 6 month subs run out.
They have implied that they have between 500k -600K subs, as if it was above 600K they would have said above 600k but below 1 mill
They then say that they only break even if they can sustain 500K, but after this month will go below that 500K, so from next month SWTOR will be losing money, when the 6 month subs expire plus the other people naturally quitting from being finished with the game. Next month will have steeper drop in subs than normal, and will be the last steep drop.
Originally posted by eddieg50 A failure at half a million players LOL, Vanguard would die to have a quarter that many players
If SWTOR did not go F2P, Vanguard will probably have more pop than SWTOR soon!
SWTOR has gone from 1.7m to 0.5m in 6 months and is still declining, and the 6 month subbers expire this month too, plus some will probably quit and wait for F2P now.
Vanguard goes F2P soon too. It will be interesting to see which one will do the best.
One of Vanguards probelms is similar to SWTOR, in that it does not run too well on older machines (at the time of their release), if at all. Now more people should be able to play Vanguard, yet with SWTOR it will take a few more years for more people to have PCs capable.
Originally posted by sammandarIf EA reported a net loss of $205 million on Q3, with SWTOR failing as it did, I wonder how much of a net loss will they report on Q4.
EA made net profit of 400M for Q4FYI2012, 76M net profit for FYI2012. Enough said, enough stupid talk.
These games were meant to be the next big thing/ wow-killer.
Shadowbane
Fury
Tabula Rasa
Dungeon Runners
Chronicles of Spellborne
These games are not even playable anymore
Hellgate London (don't know anything about this game)
Uh, and wait EQ2 was the second part of the most successful MMO of its time, but somehow lost to a game made by a company that knew nothing about MMOs?
Chronicles of Spellborne actually had a very impressive character creation & customization system which should be "borrowed" by a future MMO.
Originally posted by eddieg50 A failure at half a million players LOL, Vanguard would die to have a quarter that many players
If SWTOR did not go F2P, Vanguard will probably have more pop than SWTOR soon!
SWTOR has gone from 1.7m to 0.5m in 6 months and is still declining, and the 6 month subbers expire this month too, plus some will probably quit and wait for F2P now.
Vanguard goes F2P soon too. It will be interesting to see which one will do the best.
One of Vanguards probelms is similar to SWTOR, in that it does not run too well on older machines (at the time of their release), if at all. Now more people should be able to play Vanguard, yet with SWTOR it will take a few more years for more people to have PCs capable.
Even with newer machines TOR hasn't been smooth for some people. For me I upgraded my video card and ran gamebooster and the game ran like a champ. Then again my rig was bought in 2010 on discount for 600 bucks. MMO makers really need to take this kind of stuff into account if they expect their games to reach a mass audience.
Comments
Surely there have been some other crashes aswell, tabula, Aoc and warhammer to mention some of them. But this must be the biggest one when it comes to invested money! Not to mention the hype!
For those who missed their last trailer: http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/star-wars-the-old-republic-fake-trailer
I liked Spellborn alot, it just really never got ... finished because Acclaim sucked so badly. I also think that Shadowbane was the victim of a bad release and rushed deleivery more than it was a bad game. SWTOR is different because they had no problems with money or production costs yet still decided to push the game out early, even worse to me is that even if the game had come out bug free and playable .. which it still is not, on release it would still be boring as hell. I at least had fun on Spellborn after my 23rd log in attempt. EA is the ONLY thing keeping SWTOR afloat right now, any other company could not afford the money loss to keep it on life support. SWTOR deserves to die but just hasn't yet, much like a few other WOW clones like WAR, LOTR, AOC, that all should be dead but continue to plauge us, I call them Zombie MMORPGS and gladly put SWTOR on that list of undead necro games.
Also Shadowbane didnt have the user base but it did last longer as a PTP title, it also didnt bankrupt UBIsoft.
Sorry,
that title is reserved for dark and light.
But you can take second bigged mmo failure to date.
I am not presenting anything, I am asking for back up for claims of those who do, or rather point out their lack of...
Depends on source and definition of break even point. One link is just couple posts above.
Link it 1001st time then, I have never seen it ever apart from usual stuff like "it will be the greatest game ever".
Certainly not SW:TOR. I'd say one of the following:-
1) Auto Assault
2) Wish (didn't even make it out of beta)
3) APB (not Reloaded)
4) FF XIV
Leaning heavily towards (4).
LMAO... brilliant trailer!
Consider how much money SWTOR cost to produce and develop (at least $200mil), the cast of voice actors hired to do the voice overs and the names behind the game (Bioware, EA, Star Wars) and you're telling us that 1-4 were a bigger failure? I think not my friend.
There have certainly been other failures in the mmo genre, but by far I would consider SWTOR to be biggest failure of them all. Just my opinion of course :-)
So despite losing same money, the business is more fail if it has a brand on it strapped on?
Does your logic apply to success as well? Do you consider products of unknown brands to be more or less successful than well branded products?
Also, I am lost how voice actors got into your train of thoughts completely...
But that's the thing, they didn't just lose some money, they lost and are still losing tons of money. I don't think anyone other than Bio/EA execs know exactly how much money they've lost, but I'm certain it is no small change.
What's that saying: "The higher you go the harder the fall"? In the case of SWTOR, we're not talking about some small budget no-name gaming company; we're talking about one of the heavy weights in the industry. It is "more fail" because of the name. If I made a movie that tanked, would you care? (no), but if George Lucas or Steven Spielberg made a movie that tanked, people would be talking about it for months, maybe even years!
The name always matters.
P.S. Think of what people will say about GW2 if it fails compared to if EoC fails...
Ah, so even EA top management does not know but you do... I think that explains it.
Also do I get it right that "failure" is measured in how much people talk about it?
I think I got it already...
You misunderstand what I mean. Failure is obviously measured on how bad something does; of course, failure is subjective. Some would argue that Tabula Rasa was a bigger failure than SWTOR, yet we we most certainly know that SWTOR lost much more money than TR ever did; however, TR is no longer available for play, SWTOR still is (key word "still"). TR was also P2P before it went to F2P before it went "adios"... will the same happen to SWTOR, only time will tell.
Having said all that, SWTOR is by far the biggest failure in the mmo industry. It never met any of it's objectives (Bio/EA kept having to redifine what they were aiming for) and who knows how much further it will fall... we'll see.
But SWToR isn't losing money. They are not making as much as projected. They aren't making as much as last month. They aren't making as much as the first month.
But they are not losing money.
The income is positive atm. They have sub money coming in, and still even some box sales coming in, so that is positive income. The fact that they have laid off so many workers also shows that they made sure they could meet not only their expenses, but maintain their profit margin.
So, I'm not sure where SWToR ever 'lost' money. I see SWToR as completely missing the mark on 'how much' would be made.
EA has been losing money since Q3 (Feb 1st 2012); and this is before SWTOR going F2P. It will be interesting to see EA's Q4 numbers.
What I failed to clarify is that by SWTOR I meant EA (Bio/EA).
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/02/01/ea-sees-205-million-net-loss-in-q3-rise-in-social-games-users/
Net loss does not mean the company is losing money....
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/netloss.asp#axzz22UbEcDBm
Definition of 'Net Loss'
The result that occurs when expenses exceed the income or total revenue produced for a given period of time. For tax purposes, net losses in one time period can be used to counteract the income/gains generated in another time period. Under tax law, this loss can be carried back as far as two years.
Also referred to as a net operating loss (NOL).
Investopedia explains 'Net Loss'
A person or company with a net loss has not made a profit for a given year. Newer businesses often run at a net loss for the first few years, while acquiring one-time high cost expenses such as equipment, buildings, technology and rights. Businesses that have a net loss don't necessarily go bankrupt because they may opt to use their retained earnings or loans in order to stay afloat. This strategy, however, is only short term, as a company without profits cannot continue surviving for a long period of time.
Who would've thought defining "failure" would be so incredibly complicated?
Just years of forum experience...heh.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
hahaha... agreed.
Eh...unfortunately for you, I can put those terms into a context that is slipping you.
Reported net loss is just due deferred revenue.
ie.
When I sell you a car, I will be reporting net loss due my expenses I have for the time and work needed for it's manufacturing. Once I receive your money, my deferred revenue will be recognized as earnings.
I guess that means that SWTOR's failure is even more of a serious matter; being the only sub based game post Q3. If EA reported a net loss of $205 million on Q3, with SWTOR failing as it did, I wonder how much of a net loss will they report on Q4.
As to your analogy, that's if the "deferred revenue" arrives and is large enough to off-set the continual expenses which will carry on to Q4. Deferred revenue only works in the case of one-time expenses, as in starting a business, not continual expenses, as in running a business; big difference.
Vanguard
Warhammer Online
These games were meant to be the next big thing/ wow-killer.
Shadowbane
Fury
Tabula Rasa
Dungeon Runners
Chronicles of Spellborne
These games are not even playable anymore
Hellgate London (don't know anything about this game)
Uh, and wait EQ2 was the second part of the most successful MMO of its time, but somehow lost to a game made by a company that knew nothing about MMOs?
Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need.
It may be making some money at the moment, but I do not see it happening after this month when peoples 6 month subs run out.
They have implied that they have between 500k -600K subs, as if it was above 600K they would have said above 600k but below 1 mill
They then say that they only break even if they can sustain 500K, but after this month will go below that 500K, so from next month SWTOR will be losing money, when the 6 month subs expire plus the other people naturally quitting from being finished with the game. Next month will have steeper drop in subs than normal, and will be the last steep drop.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
Vanguard goes F2P soon too. It will be interesting to see which one will do the best.
One of Vanguards probelms is similar to SWTOR, in that it does not run too well on older machines (at the time of their release), if at all. Now more people should be able to play Vanguard, yet with SWTOR it will take a few more years for more people to have PCs capable.
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
EA made net profit of 400M for Q4FYI2012, 76M net profit for FYI2012. Enough said, enough stupid talk.
Chronicles of Spellborne actually had a very impressive character creation & customization system which should be "borrowed" by a future MMO.
http://wyrdblogging.blogspot.com/
Even with newer machines TOR hasn't been smooth for some people. For me I upgraded my video card and ran gamebooster and the game ran like a champ. Then again my rig was bought in 2010 on discount for 600 bucks. MMO makers really need to take this kind of stuff into account if they expect their games to reach a mass audience.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft