Did Ineffective Monetization Kill Star Wars: The Old Republic?

Karloff

New member
Oct 19, 2009
6,474
0
0
Did Ineffective Monetization Kill Star Wars: The Old Republic?



Star Wars' unlimited subscription model is blamed for MMO failure.

In the wake of it would be the last of its kind [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/118818-Star-Wars-The-Old-Republic-Goes-Free-to-Play]. Was he right? There's at least one who thinks so: Ramin Shokrizade, Game and Monetization Director for RIVET Studios Ltd, a Manchester-based game company. An expert in virtual worlds and goods, he thinks ineffective monetization was a major cause of the game's downfall, and that it was never going to work on an unlimited subscription basis.

"The problem with the unlimited subscription model," says Shokrizade, "is that it rewards players for blasting through your content as fast as possible." The faster they get through it, the less they have to pay for since they can cancel their subscription as soon as the content runs out. Most who binge in this way can get through an entire game in under a month, and Shokrizade describes this as "a recipe for canceled subscriptions and poor retention."

He also has words of warning for the Star Wars freemium switch. "Converting a game from a subscription model to a free-to-play model is difficult to do effectively - especially if the base game is complex - and is no guarantee of increased revenues." Such a switch needs to be carefully planned at the earliest stages of game design; something that is unlikely to have happened during the development of Star Wars: The Old Republic. "In the case of [Star Wars], this is likely its most fatal flaw and should act as a clear warning to future MMO producers to consider this aspect of game design earlier and more carefully." On the other hand a well crafted switch could significantly increase revenue, and Shokrizade estimates there's a potential two to four times increase on first year income at stake if it is done right.

"Any new MMO entering the market in the current environment," Shokrizade concludes, "must be carefully designed from the start to endure long enough to build market share." A successful, long-lived game like World of Warcraft already has a war chest substantial enough to fund multiple expansions, which is what will keep players coming back again and again. A new entrant to the market will need to consider its monetization model carefully, since it hasn't got the kind of resources needed to unseat the current MMO champs. Choose unwisely and the game could crash and burn, an awful warning for the next entrant to the MMO sphere.

Source: Gamasutra [http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/175409/What_went_wrong_with_Star_Wars_The_Old_Republic.php]


Permalink
 

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,218
0
0
I'm still unsure if the switch will be graceful. Bioware has made a lot of beginner's missteps in handling their first MMO. The same might be said for how they handle the transition to Freemium.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
Jan 4, 2010
12,010
0
41
Country
United States
Soviet Heavy said:
I'm still unsure if the switch will be graceful. Bioware has made a lot of beginner's missteps in handling their first MMO. The same might be said for how they handle the transition to Freemium.
And I guarantee EA will be breathing down their neck through the entire process. I don't expect it to end well.
 

elilupe

New member
Jun 1, 2009
533
0
0
I'm sure this was a problem for The Old Republic, and I get that this guy probably knows more than me, being an expert and all, but I can't seem to get the thought out of my mind that The Old Republic hasn't been doing well for more obvious reasons than the subscription model. Like, you know, dated combat, way too many group quests, and a bland art style.
 

Fr]anc[is

New member
May 13, 2010
1,893
0
0
If you rushed through TOR, you're doing it wrong. I can't blame you for it since it is literally a wow clone with a dialog wheel taped on, but still.
 

Zaik

New member
Jul 20, 2009
2,077
0
0
Star Wars' unlimited subscription model is blamed for MMO failure.
I'm not going to play grammar nazi, but I thought part of the appeal to working online was that you didn't have to type the header in that goofy ass newspaper style >.>
 

Bill Nye the Zombie

New member
Apr 27, 2012
67
0
0
There is a video by a guy who says the reason TOR failed was that by getting rid of rep grinds, personal crafting, etc., there was nothing to do after you were done with the story, so people just left. I for one kinda liked the story, but it was nothing special, especially after seeing TSW's story.And the [http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=16570] environments [http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=16538]. ugh.
 

Lunar Templar

New member
Sep 20, 2009
8,225
0
0
elilupe said:
I'm sure this was a problem for The Old Republic, and I get that this guy probably knows more than me, being an expert and all, but I can't seem to get the thought out of my mind that The Old Republic hasn't been doing well for more obvious reasons than the subscription model. Like, you know, dated combat, way too many group quests, and a bland art style.
gonna have to say, this

aside from the story's, which where unimpressive anyway, it offers absolutely nothing new that is worth while.
 

UnderGlass

New member
Jan 12, 2012
210
0
0
elilupe said:
I'm sure this was a problem for The Old Republic, and I get that this guy probably knows more than me, being an expert and all, but I can't seem to get the thought out of my mind that The Old Republic hasn't been doing well for more obvious reasons than the subscription model. Like, you know, dated combat, way too many group quests, and a bland art style.
It was too same-y to really grab the Zeitgeist but I get the point this guy is trying to make. WoW's overall design is even more dated yet their sub numbers are still astronomical so it's not necessarily the systems or game-play which drove people to blast through then drop The Old Republic. Despite being built on a very safe model there was still massive initial interest. Maybe the desire to find a new game world to inhabit long term just isn't there any more. Full-access sub models do encourage people to play through the content as quickly as possible before moving on. Particularly in games at the very beginning of their life-spans, where content is mostly front-loaded.

Honestly I think he's right, and no modern MMO is going to be able to get away from this phenomenon. In my opinion WoW is only still as popular as it is for the simple reason that so many people have been at it so long and invested so much. I'm sure the social/community aspect is the glue that holds WoW together. All new games will have an incredibly difficult time re-creating that lightning in a bottle no matter how special or innovative they are.

Perhaps I'm wrong. But I'd be interested to see some numbers on WoW's new subscribers and new-player retention to see if it's comparable with newcomers on the MMO scene.
 

Karathos

New member
May 10, 2009
282
0
0
What a lovely sensationalist headline once again - SW:TOR is not dead, so it's hardly been 'killed' by anything. Servers are merging due to lower populations, sure, but it's an easy and natural solution so people don't have to wait forever for PvP and PvE. At least on EU side on the "The Progenitor" RP-PvE server everything is alive and well with a big community. And I highly doubt people look for the RP servers first when joining an MMO, since roleplayers are always a minority in the community.

As for free to play, I'll still gladly keep paying my subscription and enjoying the game. I love Star Wars and KOTOR (especially the original, #2 goes from 'Decent' to 'Good' with the community restoration patch) so Old Republic is basically just more of that and I'm prepared to pay for quality. Even if SW:TOR was the best golden game ever brought to mankind from the treasure chests of Odin and a natural cure for AIDS, polio and about four and a half different types of cancer; it would still suffer from the oh-so-original EA hate because that's just what one is supposed to do nowadays.

I don't mind it going F2P as long as it doesn't affect my playing. So far MMO's that have gone from subscription to F2P have all had a massive drop in community quality on servers I've been on, and generally have just started messing with the paying customer. LotRO asking me to buy questpacks I used to have, APB giving people incredibly overpowered weapons, World of Tanks letting people buy their way to victory - list goes on...

If anything, I'm worried that F2P will 'kill' The Old Republic.
 

GasparNolasco

New member
Dec 13, 2010
80
0
0
That must have been effective, but I guess the many design flaws of the game and the fact that it was a WOW Clone surely "helped" it's demise.
The plan was to trump WOW with the Star Wars brand and Bioware's good will (and it worked fairly well considering the amount of hype the title generated, but if the product is not better than (or a least different from) World of Warcraft, I don't see why players who invested hours in one game would want to jump to another and stay there.
 

Seventh Actuality

New member
Apr 23, 2010
551
0
0
People can analyze this all they like, but the bottom line is to compete with WoW you have to actually make a game that's as good as WoW. TOR wasn't/isn't a bad game (unlike Rift, I don't regret buying it) but the reasons for its failure are pretty clear to anyone who has played it.
 

tmande2nd

New member
Oct 20, 2010
602
0
0
It did the EXACT SAME FUCKING THING THAT EVERY BIOWAREA GAME DOES.


EA assumes that if you can get the overlap of a venn diagram, you can get both circles.
No.

SPRPG players do not want to play an MMO.
MMO players to not want to play an SPRPG.

There are however people who overlap and will play a very heavily SPRPG influenced MMO.
However there are even more people who wont.

Its not a horrible game, but it did nothing new, and had no end game content.
Same thing with ME becoming a turd party shooter, and Dragon Age becoming an action game.

They are trying to appeal to a broad audience, but end up appealing to very few people.
Added to that they are cheapskates who cut corners and offend those who would like the game.

Its just fail an epic scale.
 

faefrost

New member
Jun 2, 2010
1,280
0
0
What killed SWTOR was ineffectual monetization during the development process. I am sorry but the problem isn't the games subscription, or its gameplay, or its endgame, or any bugs or content. Those are all symptoms. The problem is the damn thing cost more to make then they would ever have any hope of getting back, regardless of payment model. They spent half a billion dollars USD on this sucker folks! That's just development marketing and licensing costs. That doesn't include ongoing expenses. When you screw up the accounting that badly there is no hope. It does not matter of the game is good, bad, or just another wow clone. It is completely irrelevant at that point. SWTOR failed at least a year before release. It wasn't lousy inexperienced devs. It was lousy inexperienced accountants.

And going ftp will not save this mess. The problem is the massive development costs still sitting out there as a write off / massive loss. WoW was a success not simply because it hit 10 million subscribers. It was a success because it cost under $50 million to make, and then had 10 million subscribers. Rift, while not blowing the doors off anyone subscriber wise is a succesful game, because it cost well under $50 million to make and has a subscriber base capable of supporting those development costs at a profit. LotRO was able to be turned around by going ftp, not because of the magis=c of ftp, but because its development costs were low enough to be supported and recouped by ftp business models.

The payment model is not the magic fix or the wave of the future that everyone seems to think it is. Games can do well with any of the payment models. Subscription, Xpac, ftp, or a hybrid of the above. The key is being able to control your development costs so you have the flexibility to find the model that works best for your game, and have low enough amortization costs that you can see a return on your development costs. Right now that sweet spot seems to be at or under $50 million or so. I don't think any game that has gone over that on initial release has succeeded (Conan, Warhammer, SWTOR) while the majority of games that have kept themselves more conservatively budgeted have found their niche and turned a profit. (WoW, Eve Online, Rift, LotRO, etc)

It doesn't matter how good a game you have or how good an IP, you also need good and frugal managers and accountants. Sometimes the cries of publisher or financier interference are not the evils that we portray them as in the gamer community. The recent mess over at 38 Studios should be a shining example of this. Once again it would not have mattered how good the game was. The development costs had exceeded any chance of profit from the product. The investors and the Governor understood that. The management and developers did not. That's why they lost their funding.
 

Ranorak

Tamer of the Coffee mug!
Feb 17, 2010
1,946
0
41
I'm sorry, but blame whatever you want, in the end the game was just meh.
It did nothing new and it did nothing better.

That's what killed the game.
It was a sub-par WoW clone (down to the /commands and button layout) that was wearing a Star Wars suit.

I was promised something new and different, and what I got was the same I saw 20 times before.

That is why it failed.
 

spectrenihlus

New member
Feb 4, 2010
1,918
0
0
Dear game developers

STOP MAKING CLONES OF WORLD OF WARCRAFT. If people wanted to play a game like WoW, they would already be playing WoW.