BioWare's Star Wars MMO Won't Make Any Money, Says Free-to-Play Developer

[Spinozaad]

... two things are obvious:

1. MMO's have stagnated with a lack of good ideas and are rehashing the same content again and again.

More or less agreed.

Although the critical question would be to ask if TOR fulfills the criteria of a 'rehash'. If it doesn't, the reasoning falls flat.

2. The current MMO model only works for extremely established games (WoW, EVE, EQ).

Not agreed.

The current model works for established games, but only? That's too much of an absolute for me to accept.

Only MMO's that are established can succesfully live on a subscription-based system.
TOR is not an established MMO.
--------------------------------
Therefore, TOR can not succesfully live on a subscription-based system.

That's too rigid reasoning, at least it is to me. TOR might bring a new element to MMO's that others might want to check out. Bioware is known for its quality. Star Wars is a big franchise. All arguments that work in favour as to why it might work on subscriptions.

The fact that there are more MMO's released in a year than RTS's is an insane sign of market saturation. MMO's require many, many subscribers to work. The more those subscribers get shifted around, the less ALL MMO's will succeed.

Well, that's assuming that there's only a set and definite amount of people willing to play a/any MMO. Might be try, might not be. But it is a presupposition.

As for the market saturation... The comparison might not apply. Perhaps there are more MMO's released each year because the market for MMO's is not yet saturated, while those for RTS's is?

It's not fallacious reasoning, it's common sense.

"A penny saved is a penny earned" is common sense. As is "you got to spend money to make money". The reasoning this man applied is fallacious (but not in an intentional, sneaky kind of way). Of course, when you make predictions (like this Free-to-Play Developer did), you're awefully quick into faulty-reasoning territory by the very nature of a prediction.

Because LOTR (a niche game comparable to Star Wars) and CO (another niche game that has existing competition in that niche) have had little luck with their models, it is highly likely that, in a market that is saturated in very similar games, that one game will somehow run against the norm.

WoW, EQ, and EVE are not the norm.

WoW is the norm, simply because it is the illustrious giant to which all MMO's are compared. EverQuest and EVE, however, are indeed, not the norm.

 

[FFMattCR]

I hope its not just me,
But I'd rather pay monthly and get "all" of a game, so to speak, than play for free but have to pay if i want certain items, classes or in some cases even areas and quests/missions :S

And I'm unsure about comparing SW:TOR to Champions, the reason Champions didnt make money was because Cryptic realised City of Heroes was a great concept, it just needed tweaking and updating, and they screwed up when they tried to remake it (Wasn't there also something about the Cryptic team who made City of Heroes not being the same Cryptic team who made Champions? I don't remember but I thought there was something like that after the Marvel Lawsuit)

 

[Nephilium]

BioWare's Star Wars MMO Won't Make Any Money, Says Free-to-Play Developer

Cryptic Studios' head Jack Emmert said that any MMO that didn't offer a F2P option was "skating uphill,"

Hmm interesting that the Head of Cryptic studios, A company currently running Star Trek Online, an MMO with no Free To Play option should say that dont you think?

 

[Nimzar]

Spoiler: Sorry everyone

That chart is actually very frightening.

...I mean I knew about the data it contains... but actually seeing it graphed like that...

I don't have super high hopes for TOR.

It is nice that MMOs can attempted a final save by going Free-to-play without it being financial suicide for the developer/publish.

I recently started up a LotRO account while waiting for Cataclysm... something I wouldn't have done if it weren't free-to-play. I did spend the minimum amount on LotRO game currency ($6.50) to unlock a few of the things that simply spending some money unlocks, but have otherwise been enjoying the game. By going with an alternate model, Turbine earned $6.50 from me that they may never have seen otherwise.

 

[C117]

Well, I won't buy a MMO which ISN'T Free-to-Play, simply because I don't like the idea of having to pay for a game I've already bought.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

These days I just seem to equate the abbreviation CEO with "fnord". Nothing that comes after it will affect you in any way, but it's sure to get you upset.

 

[Albino Boo]

Here's a novel idea.
Purchase game, no monthly payments.
Oh wait, Guild Wars.
Hmm...

Purchase game, no monthly payments.
Introduce an new full price expansion every year
introduce microtransactions
Oh wait, Guild Wars.

You end paying the same amount money just a different way.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Spoiler: Sorry everyone

As good as it may be I just can't see it staying afloat for any more than a couple of years. Anyone remember Aion?

People still play Lineage?

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

The only MMORPG that didn't turn into a complete disaster a year after it's launch was The Guild Wars, but it had no subscription.

This guy is right.

MMORPG's are a very small market compared to the gaming market as a whole. 12 million WoW players? Pffffft.

My hypothesis on why Guild Wars survived despite not having subscriptions is due to their efficient resource management. Resources such as network bandwidth, computational power, etc. were all probably considered during its stage of development.

Guild Wars although does have some microtransactions for more or less meaningless things people seem to buy so that has probably helped a bit.

 

[TheEvilCheese]

Well, It's a Bioware game.
Where you get to stab people with a lightsabre.
With your friends.

How could it possibly fail?

 

[DoctorObviously]

I have the same feeling here. WoW pretty much dominates the market on subscriptions for MMO's, and nobody's going to say: "Hey, let's pay for 2 MMO's each month." I could be wrong, but such a big budget could've gone to... say, Mass Effect 3.

 

[Cousin_IT]

On the other hand, of all the MMO's around, SW:TOR seems the most likely to be able to make subscriptions work in the face of extreme competition from WoW. Star Wars is a massive brand, and BioWare has an excellent reputation, both of which will be instrumental in getting people to try out the game. SW:TOR has also won a number of accolades at the last two E3s', suggesting that it might be good enough to keep people playing, which is what will really make it a success.

There inlies the biggest hurdle. Getting people to try a new MMO is easy. Getting them to stay &/or maintaining a high turnover in the medium-longterm is the hard part. LOTRO, Warhammer, POtBS all had high interest at release, & 6-12 months later were all merrily marching downhill.

 

[Coldie]

Well, It's a Bioware game.
Where you get to stab people with a lightsabre.
With your friends.

How could it possibly fail?

Oh there's a bazillion factors that may or may not contribute to its success or failure.

For instance, it's a BioWare game. They have no experience with MMOs multiplayer games.
You get to hit people with rubber inflatable lightsabers over and over with no visible effect.
With your friends in a story that is focused on you and you alone... you get the picture.

Pricing model will play a huge part in the game's success. It'll start big, no doubt, but once the first free month passes, we'll see how it'll go from there.

 

[seditary]

and nobody's going to say: "Hey, let's pay for 2 MMO's each month."

I have no idea why people say this. Most gamers I would imagine spend more money on non MMO games each month than 2 or even more subscriptions. I know several people who are subscribed to WoW, City of Heroes and STO at the same time. Instead of spending hundreds and hundreds of dollars on new games each month to play they pay 45 or so in subscription fees to play 3 games that have enough content to last years.

 

[Azmael Silverlance]

Probably all of Warcrafts players are SW fans....but not all SW fans are warcraft players...
Star wars is a HUGE brand and when it has sex with Bioware every magazine in the wolrd will want the picture of their child....I love WOW but i will...i MUST check taht game out when it is released!
And so far this seems like the only possible kingslayer on the MMO market...or at least it could become a prince.

 

[z3rostr1fe]

The only MMORPG that didn't turn into a complete disaster a year after it's launch was The Guild Wars, but it had no subscription.

This guy is right.

MMORPG's are a very small market compared to the gaming market as a whole. 12 million WoW players? Pffffft.

My hypothesis on why Guild Wars survived despite not having subscriptions is due to their efficient resource management. Resources such as network bandwidth, computational power, etc. were all probably considered during its stage of development.

Guild Wars although does have some microtransactions for more or less meaningless things people seem to buy so that has probably helped a bit.

Ah yes... PvP packs, GOtY upgrade, Extra Character Slot, etc. But those are just optional components. You are not actually restricted in terms of content(ie. Missing Items).

 

[Woodsey]

I think he may be underestimating the appeal of BioWare + Star Wars, as well as the appeal to non-MMORPG players like myself.

But it is StarWars, just look how much Force unleashed and the older Starwars MMO sold, even both of them are badly rated.

I think Galaxies was fairly well-received when it came out, just SOE made some rather unpopular changes.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Is it weird that, when I read this article and then looked at the accompanying image I realized the sith on the left simply needs to transition to a bind to murder the jedi? Or, since he is obviously parrying, he could simply do a press with a slight pause in his tempo, attack to her inside high line and then, if circumstances require, disengage back to the lower outside?

This is why being on the internet late is a terrible idea. I'm noticing all the wrong things with the article I think. Something about not making money with subscriptions for a property guaranteed to at least get millions to play at the outset?

 

[GeorgW]

Hm, let's see here. Bioware+Star Wars+MMO+better commercials than the prequel movies=no profit? HOW IS THAT EVEN POSSIBLE??
I hate MMOs, and even I'm thinking about getting it.

 

[Amarinth]

Funny he mentions Lord of the Rings Online as an example of a game that failed on subscriptions, it did fine on subscriptions for over 3 years. Sure it got nowhere near WoW, but it had a solid fanbase and wasn't anywhere near dying. The only reason Turbine changed it to a F2P-hybrid model (which I might add STILL has subscriptions as an option) is because they saw how much cash DDO brought in when it went F2P. DDO actually got MORE subscribers after F2P than it had before.

So subscriptions (even outside WoW) aren't dead - there are plenty of games that still live healthily off monthly subscriptions. The problem is that there are so many non-subscription-based games on the market these days that people willing to pay are more inclined to try something with a lower entry threshold.

Plenty of people will still try SWTOR, regardless of the entry cost, but it'll really need to be good to make people stick around long enough to decide whether it's worth the subscription fee or not. Too many games failed on lack of content and polish at launch, once you lose those initial buyers it's harder to win them back.