EA Share Price Slides Over Old Republic Concerns

[JediMB]

Personally I'm letting my SWTOR subscription run out on February 18...

Then I'm playing Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning (EA game).

Then I'm playing Mass Effect 3 (EA game).

Then I'm resuming my SWTOR subscription with the game time card I've already ordered alongside my Reckoning pre-order. So as an RPG fan, the biggest problem for EA/SWTOR right now is that they're releasing competing titles.

EDIT:

I suppose I should say then that it would have been wiser if Electronic Arts had set the release date after Reckoning and Mass Effect 3, to avoid people canceling subscriptions in order to focus on those other games.

That would have also given BioWare more time to fix all the various issues their players are getting turned off by right now.

 

[F-I-D-O]

Aren't MMOs supposed to be more of a long term investment?
Just as a standard game might not be immediately profitable (say a $100 million game only sells 1.5 million on launch day at $60), they would reach profitability over the next couple months, and then DLC would be helped by the profits, as well as bringing in more money.

I imagine that a launch MMO, especially modern day, wouldn't have crazy profits in the first couple months. The initial dev support to fix launch issues/big bugs can't be cheap. As it becomes more stable and more devs move away, the upkeep would get cheaper. I imagine there'll be an expansion within one and a half to two years, which will be when it really turns profitable. Especially as subscription money comes in. They're charging people for a full game every six months. That's not to say EA shouldn't be a little worried. They only have around 1 million subs last I checked (they'll reach profitability in about 24 years with no growth). And I bet they thought the license would give them a bigger launch.

But WoW didn't have 10 million subs overnight. They have that many because they made a good game that they've supported with constant updates. I can understand why people may be worried to get accounts. I haven't tried it, because I want to wait and see how it is in a few months. The launch period is really telling of how they'll handle the game, and if they keep up support I'll be more inclined to get an account. The launch issues and lack of a trial have also probably turned off some people.
If they set up a free trial, and come out with some cool content over the next few months, they shouldn't worry too much. It's not like Star Trek Online which had very few subs and little support (did they just shut it down, or is it free to play?).
Oh, who can't wait for MechWarrior Online?

 

[Treblaine]

First things first: let's not turn this into a "The Old Republic cures cancer/shot my dog" conversation. Some people like it, some people don't and the general consensus seems to be that while it suffers from issues of various sorts, it's certainly not the ugliest MMO launch ever. Neither I nor anyone else cares what you think about The Old Republic.

In that case where's the discussion value in this thread?

How are we supposed to discuss this if we can't talk about why we think TOR is or isn't living up to expectations?

I think the issue is the objective financial viability of all of EA.

Not each person's personal opinion raving/raging on it.

 

[12th_milkshake]

well i'm surprised! EA usually are right on the ball with their careless attributes and greedy assumptions.

 

[ecoho]

Let me get this straight, an MMO that got over a million subscribers in under two weeks, making it the fastest growing MMO at launch ever, isn't doing good enough?

Not if EA's expectations were that it'd launch with two million. I stress if because I don't know, but it wouldn't surprise me - they've been very very ambitious with TOR. EA didn't throw this kind of money around to get a moderately successful MMO.

One million isn't really that good. Warhammer Online, an infamous flop, launched with 800,000 subscribers, and that wasn't hyped to near the level of The Old Republic.

TOR runs the real risk of being unable to live up to the unrealistically high expectations of not only its playerbase, but of its investors, and that's not a good place for it to be at.

well to be fair warhammer was doomed from the get go as it looked and felt like a straight up clone of wow(yes i know warhammer came first but WOW published first) now if their first mmo had been from the 40k universe the game might have stood a chance as it would be different(in how combat actually was portraied at the very least)

 

[Sylveria]

well to be fair warhammer was doomed from the get go as it looked and felt like a straight up clone of wow(yes i know warhammer came first but WOW published first) now if their first mmo had been from the 40k universe the game might have stood a chance as it would be different(in how combat actually was portraied at the very least)

Doesn't help that Warhammer was kinda crap on it's own merits and had no PVE server options; a design choice that will not fly outside of the Korean market.

On another note, seeing all these warnings thrown out has taught me never to engage the contributors/mods in discussion when it's on a topic they appear to be fond of.

 

[ecoho]

well to be fair warhammer was doomed from the get go as it looked and felt like a straight up clone of wow(yes i know warhammer came first but WOW published first) now if their first mmo had been from the 40k universe the game might have stood a chance as it would be different(in how combat actually was portraied at the very least)

Doesn't help that Warhammer was kinda crap on it's own merits and had no PVE server options; a design choice that will not fly outside of the Korean market.

On another note, seeing all these warnings thrown out has taught me never to engage the contributors/mods in discussion. Huh, kinda feels like EA in here.

well not haveing pve servers didnt help them warhammer wasnt that bad a game, just not different enough from WoW and when they both cost the same you go with the one that looks better.(and wow both played better and looked better then warhammer not in graphics but in astedics)

oh and because people dont like clicking on the link ill just say what that joystick article said:

SWTOR ONLY COST 200 MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! so please stop saying it cost too much to make as WoW was like what? 150 million to make? and that was 10 years ago.

 

[Sixcess]

One million isn't really that good. Warhammer Online, an infamous flop, launched with 800,000 subscribers, and that wasn't hyped to near the level of The Old Republic.

well to be fair warhammer was doomed from the get go as it looked and felt like a straight up clone of wow(yes i know warhammer came first but WOW published first) now if their first mmo had been from the 40k universe the game might have stood a chance as it would be different(in how combat actually was portraied at the very least)

Ironically I felt that part of the problem with WAR was that it didn't look enough like WoW, or more precisely that WoW's exagerated art style was closer to the tabletop miniatures than WAR's own character models. Mind you, that was the least of WAR's problems.

How combat would be handled in a 40K MMO is an interesting question of whether or not it would be different. Pure sci-fi MMOs (like Fallen Earth and Star Trek Online) use first or third person shooter style mechanics, but 40K, like Star Wars, puts a lot of emphasis on melee combat, which I've yet to see done well in an MMO without using the hotkey system (that said I haven't played Age of Conan, so maybe they got it right.)

I don't seriously think SWTOR will be another WAR though. It's not inherently bad... I just think that it's in danger of not living up to the insanely high expectations that have been built up for it, and the level of scrutiny it's under - both from within and outwith the gaming community - isn't helping that at all. When an MMO's post-launch problems (and they all have them) are affecting the parent company's stock price, and that's getting wide media coverage, that's a glaring spotlight to have to work under.

 

[ecoho]

One million isn't really that good. Warhammer Online, an infamous flop, launched with 800,000 subscribers, and that wasn't hyped to near the level of The Old Republic.

well to be fair warhammer was doomed from the get go as it looked and felt like a straight up clone of wow(yes i know warhammer came first but WOW published first) now if their first mmo had been from the 40k universe the game might have stood a chance as it would be different(in how combat actually was portraied at the very least)

Ironically I felt that part of the problem with WAR was that it didn't look enough like WoW, or more precisely that WoW's exagerated art style was closer to the tabletop miniatures than WAR's own character models. Mind you, that was the least of WAR's problems.

How combat would be handled in a 40K MMO is an interesting question of whether or not it would be different. Pure sci-fi MMOs (like Fallen Earth and Star Trek Online) use first or third person shooter style mechanics, but 40K, like Star Wars, puts a lot of emphasis on melee combat, which I've yet to see done well in an MMO without using the hotkey system (that said I haven't played Age of Conan, so maybe they got it right.)

I don't seriously think SWTOR will be another WAR though. It's not inherently bad... I just think that it's in danger of not living up to the insanely high expectations that have been built up for it, and the level of scrutiny it's under - both from within and outwith the gaming community - isn't helping that at all.

anyone dumb enough to beleave you can judge a mmo by how its first month goes is an idiot mmos take about 1-2years to get a good ieda of how they will work.
also like i said in my other post warhammer looked like wow but lacked wows astedic which is why people chose wow over it.were as had they done 40k at the very least the chainswords and rifles would look different if not feel different from what was out at the time.

 

[tharglet]

It's not like Star Trek Online which had very few subs and little support (did they just shut it down, or is it free to play?)

It went free to play very recently (about a week ago). Tried the game myself, but just couldn't get into it.

 

[joe-h2o]

YOU DON'T NEED ORIGIN TO PLAY TOR! BUY A DISK AND YOU WILL NEVER HAVE TO SEE ORIGIN ON YOUR PC.

I don't mind Origin, it works as well as if not better than Steam for me. TOR isn't even released here yet, but then again I don't get enough time to play games that any P2P game is a worthwhile indulgence. I'll play it when it goes F2P.

I hate to be the cynic, but you should really add:

You don't need Origin to play TOR *YET*.

This is EA. I fully expect they'll spring Origin as a requirement on the TOR subscriber base when they're nice and entrenched with their characters. Then they'll have no choice but to install it if they want to keep playing.

It's like having unprotected sex with someone you know is sleeping with random people - eventually you will get a nasty disease.

Best not to take the risk in the first place - they have made their intentions with Origin very clear.

 

[darthotaku]

I'd need to see some actual, real numbers before calling this. all we have is speculation right now. yes, it may have cost half a billion dollars and been expected to be hailed as the second comming. or it may have cost a realistic amount and is actually quite a success. we won't know until EA puts out some solid information, which they should probably do to stop the guesses from actually making things worse.

unless the estimates are pretty close or even lower than what actually happened. in which case EA would probably make up for the losses with the next COD.

 

[KillerRabbit]

My "problem" with Old Republic is that it does not really add anything new to the genre, it's nice, good story, etc... but it does not introduce anything ground breaking, like the way Minecraft / similar games did when they got released. If the game would have had free roaming space flight & pvp with for ex. guild capital ships - that would be nice & impressive features to have.. but.. currently space combat is just a rail shooter sadly.

 

[Marmooset]

In other news, Escapist Magazine's stock slid by roughly 3%, possibly due to the unrealized expectations of this thread.

 

[ecoho]

YOU DON'T NEED ORIGIN TO PLAY TOR! BUY A DISK AND YOU WILL NEVER HAVE TO SEE ORIGIN ON YOUR PC.

I don't mind Origin, it works as well as if not better than Steam for me. TOR isn't even released here yet, but then again I don't get enough time to play games that any P2P game is a worthwhile indulgence. I'll play it when it goes F2P.

I hate to be the cynic, but you should really add:

You don't need Origin to play TOR *YET*.

This is EA. I fully expect they'll spring Origin as a requirement on the TOR subscriber base when they're nice and entrenched with their characters. Then they'll have no choice but to install it if they want to keep playing.

It's like having unprotected sex with someone you know is sleeping with random people - eventually you will get a nasty disease.

Best not to take the risk in the first place - they have made their intentions with Origin very clear.

im pretty sure that illegal as hell and EA would risk complete shutdown of their buisness and well they arnt going to risk that, EAs greedy not stupid.

 

[ecoho]

I'd need to see some actual, real numbers before calling this. all we have is speculation right now. yes, it may have cost half a billion dollars and been expected to be hailed as the second comming. or it may have cost a realistic amount and is actually quite a success. we won't know until EA puts out some solid information, which they should probably do to stop the guesses from actually making things worse.

unless the estimates are pretty close or even lower than what actually happened. in which case EA would probably make up for the losses with the next COD.

........ok a few things first TOR only costed 200million it was posted twice in this thread once as a link to the sorce and once by me in all caps. next EA does not publish COD they publish battlefeild.

 

[joe-h2o]

YOU DON'T NEED ORIGIN TO PLAY TOR! BUY A DISK AND YOU WILL NEVER HAVE TO SEE ORIGIN ON YOUR PC.

I don't mind Origin, it works as well as if not better than Steam for me. TOR isn't even released here yet, but then again I don't get enough time to play games that any P2P game is a worthwhile indulgence. I'll play it when it goes F2P.

I hate to be the cynic, but you should really add:

You don't need Origin to play TOR *YET*.

This is EA. I fully expect they'll spring Origin as a requirement on the TOR subscriber base when they're nice and entrenched with their characters. Then they'll have no choice but to install it if they want to keep playing.

It's like having unprotected sex with someone you know is sleeping with random people - eventually you will get a nasty disease.

Best not to take the risk in the first place - they have made their intentions with Origin very clear.

im pretty sure that illegal as hell and EA would risk complete shutdown of their buisness and well they arnt going to risk that, EAs greedy not stupid.

Well, they're definitely greedy, and based on many of their actions they're not all that smart.

It's no different to what they're doing with Mass Effect 3 - yes, it's a different game (to ME1 and ME2) but PC users are being forced into Origin if they want to carry on when they didn't require it for the first two games. EA will just mandate Origin with the release of the inevitable expansion pack for TOR.

 

[darthotaku]

I'd need to see some actual, real numbers before calling this. all we have is speculation right now. yes, it may have cost half a billion dollars and been expected to be hailed as the second comming. or it may have cost a realistic amount and is actually quite a success. we won't know until EA puts out some solid information, which they should probably do to stop the guesses from actually making things worse.

unless the estimates are pretty close or even lower than what actually happened. in which case EA would probably make up for the losses with the next COD.

........ok a few things first TOR only costed 200million it was posted twice in this thread once as a link to the sorce and once by me in all caps. next EA does not publish COD they publish battlefeild.

well I guess that makes me a dumbass doesn't it. I commented without reading most of the other comments, and I didn't care enough to look up which of those two series they actually published. thank you for correcting me.

 

[ecoho]

YOU DON'T NEED ORIGIN TO PLAY TOR! BUY A DISK AND YOU WILL NEVER HAVE TO SEE ORIGIN ON YOUR PC.

I don't mind Origin, it works as well as if not better than Steam for me. TOR isn't even released here yet, but then again I don't get enough time to play games that any P2P game is a worthwhile indulgence. I'll play it when it goes F2P.

I hate to be the cynic, but you should really add:

You don't need Origin to play TOR *YET*.

This is EA. I fully expect they'll spring Origin as a requirement on the TOR subscriber base when they're nice and entrenched with their characters. Then they'll have no choice but to install it if they want to keep playing.

It's like having unprotected sex with someone you know is sleeping with random people - eventually you will get a nasty disease.

Best not to take the risk in the first place - they have made their intentions with Origin very clear.

im pretty sure that illegal as hell and EA would risk complete shutdown of their buisness and well they arnt going to risk that, EAs greedy not stupid.

Well, they're definitely greedy, and based on many of their actions they're not all that smart.

It's no different to what they're doing with Mass Effect 3 - yes, it's a different game (to ME1 and ME2) but PC users are being forced into Origin if they want to carry on when they didn't require it for the first two games. EA will just mandate Origin with the release of the inevitable expansion pack for TOR.

ok the only reason they can do it with ME3 is because its a stand alone game, they cant do that with a TOR expansion because it would be a form of entrapment(it might be called something else not sure) and would be considered robbing their custmers. As for them not being smart......they kinda are. Look making ME3 origen exclusive make be a dick move but from a buisness stand point its very smart as people will buy the game anyways and this way you get all the profits. Now i can look at this objectivly because i dont play the PC version(360 all the way) so i can see why they did it. My only advice if you dont want origen go get it for the 360 or ps3(you can pick up all 3 on 360 for about $100)

I'd need to see some actual, real numbers before calling this. all we have is speculation right now. yes, it may have cost half a billion dollars and been expected to be hailed as the second comming. or it may have cost a realistic amount and is actually quite a success. we won't know until EA puts out some solid information, which they should probably do to stop the guesses from actually making things worse.

unless the estimates are pretty close or even lower than what actually happened. in which case EA would probably make up for the losses with the next COD.

........ok a few things first TOR only costed 200million it was posted twice in this thread once as a link to the sorce and once by me in all caps. next EA does not publish COD they publish battlefeild.

well I guess that makes me a dumbass doesn't it. I commented without reading most of the other comments, and I didn't care enough to look up which of those two series they actually published. thank you for correcting me.

lol its ok very rarly do people read the whole thing i just didnt want you to be misinformed

 

[icnfde]

........ok a few things first TOR only costed 200million it was posted twice in this thread once as a link to the sorce and once by me in all caps. next EA does not publish COD they publish battlefeild.

Even that 200 Million quote is unsourced in the LA Times article. In fact, they quote it twice in that article... without sourcing anybody. It's just as legit as saying 500 Million as was stated in the OP.

In fact, there's a likely reason why EA doesn't just come out and state the true costs of The Old Republic... it's because the rumours are true and the numbers are most assuredly higher than first suggested (game budgets typically don't include advertising costs, that's handled by the Publishers). I'm almost certain their stocks would tumble even further out of pure fear alone if the true costs were revealed. You can bet any amount of money that if the game was actually doing well, EA would be glowing with reports claiming "We put together a video game with one of the highest budgets ever recorded and we succeeded!", instead it's all quiet on the western front with their forums billowing out complaint after complaint after complaint with legitimate threads being locked or filled with trolls picketing with "TL;DR" signs.

In all honesty, I can see why the OP doesn't want people to criticize the game or to "go off topic", you wouldn't want to offend your paymasters after all especially after all the glowing praise you guys gave to EA and Bioware for Dragon Age II. In fact i'm surprised that anybody still takes this site seriously after that PR disaster.

EA Louse was right. This will be one of the biggest failures in MMO history.