John Riccitiello - "Realistically, TOR's a solid success."

[darthmorbous]

i just hope that arenanet NEVER sells to EA.

[Sanxxx]

And what about everyone else past your nose? Err, I mean, your server?

 

Exactly, he probably only wants to do a FP/OP, he should get on his ship and travel to every planet (via the 30+ loading screens) and spam general chat for 5 mins then hop over to the other faction and do the same.

 

He is just being lazy !

[JeramieCrowe]

Exactly, he probably only wants to do a FP/OP, he should get on his ship and travel to every planet (via the 30+ loading screens) and spam general chat for 5 mins then hop over to the other faction and do the same.

 

He is just being lazy !

 

Err...did you mean to quote someone else? That has absolutely NOTHING to do with his or my post.

[Supahhappy]

Corp speech to calm the shareholders.

 

Fact is that the main revenue of EA are their sports games, Medal of Honor and ofc Battlefield. Acquiring Bioware should have been their foothold in the rpg and mmo market....this did not go so well though.

 

Dragon Age 2 - crappiest sequel ever, also the long term sales numbers don't come close to the first DA.

ME 3 - good sales, horrible fan backlash because of the ending.

 

And now we have Swtor, the most overhyped mmo in history, and 6 months down the line the game is having huge problem, has lost 400k subs, is currently on a free month (!) and a huge chunk of the staff is laid off.

 

No wonder they are downplaying the meaning of this game now. And I really feel sorry for the guys and girls who are getting the boot in Austin, since it always hit's the smaller employees, while the managers and chief designers, who are really the ones behind this mess, will continue to have a job.

 

I think this is showing what happened when BioWare went full corporate. It feels like lately BioWare turned from a ton of gamers passionate about their work, too a "how can we make this profit the most?" approach.

[Sanxxx]

Err...did you mean to quote someone else? That has absolutely NOTHING to do with his or my post.

 

So he was saying there is no one on fleet, you, on your current crusade, were suggesting that most 50s are no longer on fleets and are off playing alts.

 

I suggested a route for him as a 50 to contact the other remaining players.

[JeramieCrowe]

So he was saying there is no one on fleet, you, on your current crusade, were suggesting that most 50s are no longer on fleets and are off playing alts.

 

I suggested a route for him as a 50 to contact the other remaining players.

 

No, in that post, since he said "game", meaning entire game, I was stating that just because HIS server is dead, doesn't mean they all are.

 

That's why I used the word "server", y'know? Not "fleet".

Edited May 23, 2012 by JeramieCrowe

[williambr]

That is a flat out lie, they were anticipating 8-10 million subs at release and they barely broke 2 million. 1-2 million subs were barely enough to cover the development costs.

 

Where do you get this from? They've always said from the beginning that they needed to have 500k subs to have a positive revenue flow.

 

http://www.gamespot.com/news/star-wars-the-old-republic-needs-only-500k-subscribers-ea-6297338

 

Same guy and everything lol

[Stovokor]

Spin for great benefit of glorious investors( they no speaka the MMO )

[Goretzu]

Sorry if this has been posted already, didn't see it. Search brought up nothing.

 

 

 

Source

 

Basically, TOR never was to be a "bellwether" for the company. Which actually makes sense.

 

What do you think?

 

I thinking a company claiming they were always aiming for just below what they got is par for the course.

 

I also very much doubt they were "aiming" for any such figure.

Edited May 23, 2012 by Goretzu

[Sanxxx]

Where do you get this from? They've always said from the beginning that they needed to have 500k subs to have a positive revenue flow.

 

http://www.gamespot.com/news/star-wars-the-old-republic-needs-only-500k-subscribers-ea-6297338

 

Same guy and everything lol

 

He is probably referring to the original expectation when BW were acquired.

 

From an interview with EA Games president Frank Gibeau in 2008:

 

""Both EA and LucasArts have confirmed to VG247 that the target for BioWare’s newly announced Star Wars: The Old Republic is to make an MMO with a larger userbase than World or Warcraft.

 

“We have very high expectations for this,” said EA Games president Frank Gibeau, speaking this week at LucasArts’ HQ in San Francisco. “Just look at the base of Star Wars fans, plus what BioWare can do. Trust me: we want to win. EA’s reputation is for wanting to win. This is going to be a powerful category and there’s lots of ways to compete in this category. [blizzard] created a much larger opportunity for everybody else, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to stay that way.”

 

LucasArts online boss Tom Nichols concurred, saying that the firm is banking on The Old Republic’s storytelling component to bust through WoW’s 11 million subs record.

 

http://www.vg247.com/2008/10/24/wow-...asarts-and-ea/

 

 

On that basis I'd be confident that LA have an 'interesting' royalty agreement.

[JeramieCrowe]

He is probably referring to the original expectation when BW were acquired.

 

From an interview with EA Games president Frank Gibeau in 2008:

 

""Both EA and LucasArts have confirmed to VG247 that the target for BioWare’s newly announced Star Wars: The Old Republic is to make an MMO with a larger userbase than World or Warcraft.

 

“We have very high expectations for this,” said EA Games president Frank Gibeau, speaking this week at LucasArts’ HQ in San Francisco. “Just look at the base of Star Wars fans, plus what BioWare can do. Trust me: we want to win. EA’s reputation is for wanting to win. This is going to be a powerful category and there’s lots of ways to compete in this category. [blizzard] created a much larger opportunity for everybody else, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to stay that way.”

 

LucasArts online boss Tom Nichols concurred, saying that the firm is banking on The Old Republic’s storytelling component to bust through WoW’s 11 million subs record.

 

http://www.vg247.com/2008/10/24/wow-...asarts-and-ea/

 

 

On that basis I'd be confident that LA have an 'interesting' royalty agreement.

 

Yes, but I specifically remember JR stating they're looking for 10 million subs within 10 years, not at launch like williambr was responding to. To think anyone said they're expecting 10 million at launch is ludicrous.

Edited May 23, 2012 by JeramieCrowe

[HammersteinSW]

Thank you for finding this Sanxxx, this is the article I was referring to yesterday.

 

Having the audacity to even believe in such a pipedream when your mmo launches with less features than the class primus, is a sure sign that something is going horribly wrong between management and design.

 

On launch they had no Legacy, dungeon finder, server transfers and were literally missing a ton of "quality of life" features which players have started to expect from a modern mmo. What they had were server queues and endless empty miles between starport, shuttle, starbase, ship and questing zones - something that still has not been addressed in a satisfying way.

 

Mmo players are not stupid - you might get the impression when you see some of the rage&whine posts but the majority are tech and internet savy people with a high level of consumer consciousness and little brand loyality. And when you start to ******** your consumers they will be like "Well this game does not cater to my needs, I'm off to greener fields". The only studios who have managed to turn a failing mmo around were Turbine and Trion - both of which have displayed a lot of agility when adapting to the market - and agility is not necessarily the strong point of EA.

 

Also market analysts still have no grasp on us when it comes to demographics - and never will. These people might understand finances but they don't "get" mmo stuff like quest flow, atmosphere, power curves and other things which are important to players and which breathe life into your game. You might be able to slap a Star Wars sticker on a cheap plastic toy from China and make a quick buck from it, but when it comes to mmos things don't work that way. As mmo developer you usually only get one shot at establishing a solid community with a high retention rate, Bioware has not yet achieved this.

[Sparklehorse]

Having the audacity to even believe in such a pipedream when your mmo launches with less features than the class primus, is a sure sign that something is going horribly wrong between management and design.

 

This^^.

 

They were warned, repeatedly, by many beta testers. They chose not to listen. Instead they chose to listen to those who wanted the game to be nothing like WoW. They made design decisions based on some of the developers personal opinions (grouping on fleet and no global channel I'm looking at you.)

 

I remember participating in a long and productive thread on the Beta forums in which some posters, including myself, implored them to not release the game without a cross-server (yes I said it) LFG for both PVP and PVE, a customizable interface, and several other features that are now considered "standard" in MMO's. Instead they released what they did and here we are, six months later and there is still no cross server LFG or cross server pvp ques.

 

I wish I could say they have learned from this mistake but they still seem intent on listening to the wrong people and are planning to release an inadequate group finder that won't solve anything in the next patch.

 

I would love to lay all of this squarely at the feet of EA and their corporate greed but the developers are at least, partly to blame for this. I wonder how many of those hundreds of thousands that quit never even saw the inside of a flashpoint.

[Arlbo_Nabbins]

Even if this is true, its a bang to the head for every gamer. Ok we know that most games made are only financial decisions, but what every gamer want is to believe that everyone involved in gamemaking invests heartblood. To say its not our primary goal to make the best, is like backstabbing yourself.

 

They didn't say that, they did not even come close to saying that.

 

PC MMOS are still pretty much a niche market compared to other types of title, for a company like EA SWTOR was never going to be the biggest revenue earner and they are not going to make it their number 1 priority, Bioware will.

 

That is a flat out lie, they were anticipating 8-10 million subs at release and they barely broke 2 million. 1-2 million subs were barely enough to cover the development costs.

 

Source?

 

Because that is BS, no way would any MMO expect 8 million subs in the first 6 months, let alone at release in only 2 market areas (US and Europe). It took WoW years to reach 8 million and it was worldwide.

Edited May 23, 2012 by Arlbo_Nabbins

[Goretzu]

This^^.

 

They were warned, repeatedly, by many beta testers. They chose not to listen. Instead they chose to listen to those who wanted the game to be nothing like WoW. They made design decisions based on some of the developers personal opinions (grouping on fleet and no global channel I'm looking at you.)

 

I remember participating in a long and productive thread on the Beta forums in which some posters, including myself, implored them to not release the game without a cross-server (yes I said it) LFG for both PVP and PVE, a customizable interface, and several other features that are now considered "standard" in MMO's. Instead they released what they did and here we are, six months later and there is still no cross server LFG or cross server pvp ques.

 

I wish I could say they have learned from this mistake but they still seem intent on listening to the wrong people and are planning to release an inadequate group finder that won't solve anything in the next patch.

 

I would love to lay all of this squarely at the feet of EA and their corporate greed but the developers are at least, partly to blame for this. I wonder how many of those hundreds of thousands that quit never even saw the inside of a flashpoint.

 

They never managed to get X-server in Warhammer Online either, and they were too slow with mergers.

 

However neither would be been a big problem if they'd had RvR and such ready for launch.

 

*cough*

Edited May 23, 2012 by Goretzu

[Kubernetic]

He also said subscriber numbers were growing. What metric allows him to say that nonsense?

 

He also down played SWTOR's role in the EA line up ins direct conflict with prior statements made in the SH meetings prior to launch.

 

I am not trying to be mean at all so Im sorry if I come off that way.

 

There are no HARD number to crunch and that was my point. You cannot make definitive statements without those numbers. And CEO and CFO's will manipulate and spin during SH meetings.

 

We as outsiders don't know what the exact metrics are. It's possible that the biggest drop in subs was right at the beginning of the quarter, and then rebounded at the end and started growing slowly, but steadily. If that's the case, and they have the trend data to prove it, then there is nothing wrong with saying "the subscriber numbers are growing", if you're saying they've been growing over the past two months after a huge hit in month one.

 

The fact that they are saying it to shareholders suggests that it's true, if you ask me. I'm not at all ready to put EA / BioWare in the same group as companies like WorldCom and Enron. I find it unlikely that they'd lie about the game and risk the blowback that would create if the lie was discovered.

[DiabloDoom]

This game will never match WOW for subs unless it sorts it's issues then pushes a massive marketing campaign. TV adverts did a wonder for WOW and kept it alive through Aions attempt at WOW PK. Check the chart.

 

http://users.telenet.be/mmodata/Charts/Subs-1.png

Edited May 23, 2012 by DiabloDoom

[Wayshuba]

Actually, John Riccitiello said that TOR is "very profitable". He wouldn't say that in a fiscal report to Wall Street unless it was, indeed, "very profitable". To say otherwise if it wasn't "very profitable" is a federal crime.

 

What we're concerned with, anyway, is the game, not profits. We're players, not shareholders. I, for one, couldn't care less about TOR's profitability, because it has little bearing on the future of the game. Most MMOs have turned a profit within the first 6 months to a year and still fell flat on its face after that.

 

However, a game being profitable still does not mean it has returned the investment. Sunk costs for development under GAAP are written off over a series of years. So, for example, if the industry rumors are true that EA invested a little over $300M on this title and they recognize the investment over a period of say 3 years, that leads to development investment coverage of $8.3M/month or $25/M quarter. Add that to on-going costs of support and development a quarter (say of $6M/quarter) and you have a coverage of $31M/quarter. So, if they did indeed have a true 1.3M subs, they would bring in $54.6M with $31M in cost coverage, you are indeed very profitable.

 

That being said, what if you decided to write down those sunk costs over a period of twelve months (instead of three years). Now you would have coverage of $81M/quarter with revenue of $54.6M in the same time period and therefore would not be profitable.

 

Understanding reporting requirements is always the key to knowing the state of things. Fact is, EA decided to invest another $8m-$15M in lost revenue lately to add the free 30 days to accounts. There are only two reasons to do something like this: (1) shore up numbers to seem better than they are (while still be truthful in reporting) or (2) customer goodwill. I can't see EA ever investing money like that for customer goodwill so it probably falls with the first reason.

 

Fact is, SWTOR has a LOT less than 1.3M subs right now. That is obvious from what everyone sees on the servers. I'm still willing to bet, game is at about 500k-600k active players now and still falling. When Q3 reports are in (and free month extension works out of the system) the true state of things will be known.

Edited May 23, 2012 by Wayshuba

[Hiakachi]

Under this guy's leadership (John Riccitiello ) EA has been steadily declining. 11/4/11 stock was 25.20. As of 5/22/12 stock fell to 14.26. This stock is in a steady decline. If I was a stock holder, board member this guy would be on his way out the door.

EDIT: Further - Chief Executive Officer and a Director of Electronic Arts since April 2007. He has been responsible for a major 2 year drop. 2007 stock 61.40, 2009 23.00. EA has never rebounded under his business model.

Edited May 23, 2012 by Hiakachi
More info

[Goretzu]

However, a game being profitable still does not mean it has returned the investment. Sunk costs for development under GAAP are written off over a series of years. So, for example, if the industry rumors are true that EA invested a little over $300M on this title and they recognize the investment over a period of say 3 years, that leads to development investment coverage of $8.3M/month or $25/M quarter. Add that to on-going costs of support and development a quarter (say of $6M/quarter) and you have a coverage of $31M/quarter. So, if they did indeed have a true 1.3M subs, they would bring in $54.6M with $2M in cost coverage, you are indeed very profitable.

 

That being said, what if you decided to write down those sunk costs over a period of twelve months (instead of three years). Now you would have coverage of $81M/quarter with revenue of $54.6M in the same time period and therefore would not be profitable.

 

Understanding reporting requirements is always the key to knowing the state of things. Fact is, EA decided to invest another $8m-$15M in lost revenue lately to add the free 30 days to accounts. There are only two reasons to do something like this: (1) shore up numbers to seem better than they are (while still be truthful in reporting) or (2) customer goodwill. I can't see EA ever investing money like that for customer goodwill so it probably falls with the first reason.

 

Fact is, SWTOR has a LOT less than 1.3M subs right now. That is obvious from what everyone sees on the servers. I'm still willing to bet, game is at about 500k-600k active players now and still falling. When Q3 reports are in (and free month extension works out of the system) the true state of things will be known.

 

 

Yeah I'd imagine "very profitable" would be in the context of release to whenever it was said over total costs.

 

SWTOR was bound to be very profitable in that context with 2.4m sold and subs.

 

Actually is that where the 500,000 subs things comes from? To cover development and running costs over X amount of time? It always seemed high for just running costs.

[Meldwyn]

Yes, 3 years from when they start to produce gross. This game has probably grossed around 80million so far, their net isn't much higher as all you are essentially taking away is the expenses that it takes to deliver it's product and services, then you take away tax and pay your investors dividends whatever % they may be.

 

There is soooo much more that goes in to a budget than what you have listed, unless you are grossly over simplifying for argument sake?!? Have you ever built and managed a multimillion dollar corporate budget before?

[Meldwyn]

I also don't understand a lot of people's allegiance to Bioware at this point. They clearly got swallowed up by EA and are now under their financial and visionary thumb. EA holds all the cards, pulls all the strings, and BW can do nothing about it. I wouldn't be surprised to see the good DR's retire and start their own development company again after their non-compete agreement expires (2-years usually, could be longer for them).

[DiabloDoom]

I would also like to live in such a dream bubble, where do I get one? Reality is they let people go from many different departments, not just artists (which are mostly contractors anyway) and merketers (actually, it seems like they are looking to hire people for that)

 

I live in a dream bubble because I never sat and listed every job category that BW Austin may or may not of laid off, did I say that they ONLY fired concept artists and marketers??? Would it of helped you if I put etc at the end, I presumed most people would of understood that I was generalising especially when I put in COFFEE MAKERS AND JANITORS, but apparently not, and it seemed it warranted a misinterpreted response from yourself? You assume wrong yet again but if it pleases you because you seem to need everything spelled out for you... they may have also fired but not limited to, quality assurance analysts, outsourcing coordinators, platform testers, website testers, procurement assistants, marketing analysts, website designers, and fluent programmers. I nor you have any idea whom they fired, and just for the record, EVERYONE was a contractor and most likely have or will be hired again in some other part of the company.

 

Judging by your blue text you obviously love to hear yourself speak, at least if your going to make a comment, make a point, and for the love of god stop putting words in peoples mouths.

Edited May 23, 2012 by DiabloDoom

[DiabloDoom]

unless you are grossly over simplifying for argument sake?!?

 

This, was just bulletin the key money suckers.

[DiabloDoom]

Have you ever built and managed a multimillion dollar corporate budget before?

 

Funny, you talk as if it is common to do so. Can I ask, have you?

 

I have however studied Business and Accounting at college for 2 years and have a Higher National Diploma, have started a car valeting business, and have ran an Ebay business on and off for a good few years. Also I have helped write business plans for people for funding applications.