Goretzu Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 As long as my server stays populated, I could care less how many active subscriptions there are. After 1.3 through, I believe they will start to rise again anyway. I think you mean you couldn't care less. However actually you could, because unless there's enough subs SWTOR won't get developement or expansions....... so maybe you're elegantly stating that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goretzu Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 The argument was whether or not they counted free trials. Not how they charge players in Asia (which is well known by just about everyone). They don't count free trials. Bioware will, most likely, not count them either. Every MMORPG counts free trials and free time........ why would SWTOR not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kharnis Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Every MMORPG counts free trials and free time........ why would SWTOR not? No. They don't. Free trials do not contribute to any revenues. Counting them could be seen as deliberately misleading investors concerning company fortunes. In this day and age, after the way Enron and its executives were dragged through a years-long investigation and trials that resulted in the bankrupcy of the corporation, do you really think any of the execs in EA is willing to risk that for a game that isn't even in their top five revenue generators? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goretzu Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Since they are not PAYING subs, counting them as subs in a financial report would give a false reading of the health of the game which would be fraud for a publicly traded company to do. Haters are obviously beginning their spin by suggesting that EA is going to break Federal Law over a game they have already declared as not being in their top 10. No it wouldn't be fraud, it's standard MMORPG practice. Nothing ever refers to "paying accounts" only active/open accounts (which can include all manner of things that aren't paying subs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goretzu Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) No. They don't. Free trials do not contribute to any revenues. Counting them could be seen as deliberately misleading investors concerning company fortunes. In this day and age, after the way Enron and its executives were dragged through a years-long investigation and trials that resulted in the bankrupcy of the corporation, do you really think any of the execs in EA is willing to risk that for a game that isn't even in their top five revenue generators? Cooking the Stats It is worth pointing out that there is no way to obtain irrefutable accurate information on subscribers. Only the companies responsible for the games have access to the statistics and their interpretation of an active account may be different from yours. The majority count anyone who is paying for a subscription, anyone in a free trial period or anyone who has been active on an account within the last month. They make no distinction for users with multiple accounts so they will be counted separately. Clearly the figures will not be representative of the number of users you can expect to find online within a game world at any given time – that number will be much lower. http://www.alteredgamer.com/pc-gaming/35992-mmo-subscriber-populations/ The reason they count all those is because they can. Perfectly legitimatedly and legally. This isn't a secret, it's just how things are done and have been done for a very long time now. It may be Bioware don't count some of the above, but there's no reason for them not to do so. Edited June 25, 2012 by Goretzu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kharnis Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 The reason they count all those is because they can. Perfectly legitimatedly and legally. This isn't a secret, it's just how things are done and have been done for a very long time now. It may be Bioware don't count some of the above, but there's no reason for them not to do so. So, your evidence and support for your argument is a blog from someone who doesn't back up his statement of "anyone in a free trial period" with any kind of data or facts? Look, I'm not asking you to take EA's word on faith. I'm asking you to use logic. If a company is going to publicly declare what their revenue generators are, do you really think that they are going to play fast and loose with the facts in this day and age of SEC hyper-oversight and activist investors? And do you really think they're going to do that for a game that isn't their number one revenue generator? Do you really think they're going to want to risk possible litigation, criminal charges, and corporation bankrupcy just to inflate the numbers of something that isn't in their top five money making ventures? Or do you think they're going to play it safe and not take that kind of chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranid Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 The reason they count all those is because they can. Perfectly legitimatedly and legally. This isn't a secret, it's just how things are done and have been done for a very long time now. It may be Bioware don't count some of the above, but there's no reason for them not to do so. So all those play for free subscriptions in July will count too, even though they do not generate revenue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterKayote Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 The reason they count all those is because they can. Perfectly legitimatedly and legally. This isn't a secret, it's just how things are done and have been done for a very long time now. It may be Bioware don't count some of the above, but there's no reason for them not to do so. What does it even matter how much the numbers are skewed? What ever they do or dont count is irrelevent. Its not like that number means anything to us. All we csre about is wether it goes up or down. Up = good, Down= bad. Furthermore, we just use that number to compare how the game is doing in proportion to others who ALSO skew the numbers just the same. So really, arguing on the accuracy of those announcements is pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arlbo_Nabbins Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 So all those play for free subscriptions in July will count too, even though they do not generate revenue? If the numbers reported are higher than about 400K I am sure that is what some will claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgelling Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 So all those play for free subscriptions in July will count too, even though they do not generate revenue? Well, they'll be sure to mention the free subs, and I hope it's a big hit. But they'll be releasing the figures during an earnings call, and there's no way they'll get away with not giving an actual figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goretzu Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 So, your evidence and support for your argument is a blog from someone who doesn't back up his statement of "anyone in a free trial period" with any kind of data or facts? Look, I'm not asking you to take EA's word on faith. I'm asking you to use logic. If a company is going to publicly declare what their revenue generators are, do you really think that they are going to play fast and loose with the facts in this day and age of SEC hyper-oversight and activist investors? And do you really think they're going to do that for a game that isn't their number one revenue generator? Do you really think they're going to want to risk possible litigation, criminal charges, and corporation bankrupcy just to inflate the numbers of something that isn't in their top five money making ventures? Or do you think they're going to play it safe and not take that kind of chance? Again it is perfectly legal and correct too count all those options in active accounts, which is what most MMORPGs have done for more than a decade now. What Bioware actually counts is impossible to tell, unless they specifically state it, but they will likely count what most other MMORPGs count.......... which is all of the above. There's no conspiracy here, nor any "risk", it's not "fast and loose", it's perfectly acceptable.... it's just what the industry does. It's also the reason WoW can claim the subs figures it does (and has). Although it was largely SoE that pushed the boundaries of what can counted way back in EQ1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goretzu Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 So all those play for free subscriptions in July will count too, even though they do not generate revenue? I would imagine accounts with free time on them within the last 30 days before the count date would be counted, yes. If you mean the new free accounts up to L15, I'm not sure (and there's no way to be sure without a statement from Bioware or EA), but a lot of MMORPGs do count trials so long as there has been activity on them in the last 30 days before any count of numbers. What does it even matter how much the numbers are skewed? What ever they do or dont count is irrelevent. Its not like that number means anything to us. All we csre about is wether it goes up or down. Up = good, Down= bad. Furthermore, we just use that number to compare how the game is doing in proportion to others who ALSO skew the numbers just the same. So really, arguing on the accuracy of those announcements is pointless. Yes to a degree, but equally anyone interested in the health of the game gains nothing from fooling themselves (that won't generate revenue for development or expansion pack) over what is mostly likely counted. And yes every other MMORPG does it too (hence what I said about WoW and EQ1 above). Hopefully subs will be growing, but either way what is counted....... is what is counted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafaman Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Lol. This is still going on? Look, there are a number of ways to use creative accounting to give your investors the warm and fuzzy. I'm not talking about cooking the books mind you, I'm talking about creative ways counting current revenue streams and projecting future revenue. ALL Corps do this and they try to justify a short fall or a net gain. So... it doesn't really matter how you think the should be counted or when. The net is they will have to give a number, which you may or may not agree with, but unless you are an auditor that is where it ends. No sense obsessing about it to prove your point one way or another. The health of the industry is a much bigger concern actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnkByte Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) I doubt it would go up. There isn't much of the 'second chance' factor, especially when a monthly fee is involved. The game has some fundamental game design and technical issues, that are bottleneck-ing its potential. I expect it would become just a niche MMO, played by a couple of hundreds of thousands die-hard SW fans. Pretty much similar to LOTRO, or (most probably) bit worse. I'd love to see the game overcoming its major problems and expanding. I really like some aspects of it. But I'll probably leave as soon as I spot a real MMO alternative. You know, stuff like open world without too much instancing, world PvP, exploration, faction-based drama, less e-peen-controlled immature brains, .... The exact truth in just few sentences (especially the first part). Even if technical problems are solved (i don't count on it considering nothing except very few workarounds are done by now), then the design flaws are made in game's early fundamental design stages where its impossible to ever change almost anything. Edited June 25, 2012 by SnkByte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celebrus Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) Simply put, they have months, if not years, of work still ahead of them to *MAINTAIN* the current population, much less increase it. Chances are pretty good that you wont see a positive population trend for this game for quite some time. Playing this game is like reading The Dwindling Party. Edited June 25, 2012 by Celebrus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgelling Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Simply put, they have months, if not years, of work still ahead of them to maintain a steady population. Chances are pretty good that you wont see a positive population trend for this game for quite some time. Playing this game is like reading The Dwindling Party. Isn't EA themselves about to throw The Secret World into this? As in, like a couple of weeks? I don't know, I haven't heard great things about the game, but wouldn't it be nice if EA wasn't kind of theoretically cannibalizing some potential subs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kharnis Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Again it is perfectly legal and correct too count all those options in active accounts, which is what most MMORPGs have done for more than a decade now. What Bioware actually counts is impossible to tell, unless they specifically state it, but they will likely count what most other MMORPGs count.......... which is all of the above. There's no conspiracy here, nor any "risk", it's not "fast and loose", it's perfectly acceptable.... it's just what the industry does. It's also the reason WoW can claim the subs figures it does (and has). Although it was largely SoE that pushed the boundaries of what can counted way back in EQ1. Seriously, where are you getting this from? And please don't re-link that blog. That's not evidence. I want to know where you get the "it's what the industry does" and "what most MMORPGs have done for more than a decade now" from. I'm going to try this one more time. In this time of less than stable economic conditions, where everyone and their dog are giving large corporations the hairy eyeball over their past conduct, where a great deal of people are already willing to believe every horror story and "fact" about EA and their operating practises, do you really think EA would do anything that would increase financial risk and/or losses? Do you really think that someone, somewhere, wouldn't try to take them to task for "misleading investors" should EA try to claim that free trials and free-to-play accounts are "active subscribers?" EA would probably win any suit brought against them by activist investors, sure. But it would take time, and more importantly, money. And in a time when their stock has lost a great deal of value over the last few months, why would they do anything to risk pushing it even lower? And why would they waste the money they don't need to by defending themselves in any kind of suit when they could save that money by not putting themselves in that kind of situation in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterKayote Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Yes to a degree, but equally anyone interested in the health of the game gains nothing from fooling themselves (that won't generate revenue for development or expansion pack) over what is mostly likely counted. True, but the thing is, we're totally ignorant on what their expenses are. All we know is how much they make from each sub (roughly). Everything inbetween that and what they make at the end of the day is unknown. They only said at one time they only need a million subs to break even with the development costs ... even with that its near impossible to guess exactly what that meant. For all we know,TOR could be making EA more than WoW makes Blizz, even if they have 10 times the subs TOR does. Way too many factors play into that, including how much of the profits go into future developments. Just because WoW CAN invest more back into the game doesnt mean they do. So again, its really pointless. To us, the accuracy of the sub numbers is just that ... a number. The only thing we, as consumers, can get out of it is how it compares to other games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnkByte Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Seriously, where are you getting this from? And please don't re-link that blog. That's not evidence. I want to know where you get the "it's what the industry does" and "what most MMORPGs have done for more than a decade now" from. I'm going to try this one more time. In this time of less than stable economic conditions, where everyone and their dog are giving large corporations the hairy eyeball over their past conduct, where a great deal of people are already willing to believe every horror story and "fact" about EA and their operating practises, do you really think EA would do anything that would increase financial risk and/or losses? Do you really think that someone, somewhere, wouldn't try to take them to task for "misleading investors" should EA try to claim that free trials and free-to-play accounts are "active subscribers?" EA would probably win any suit brought against them by activist investors, sure. But it would take time, and more importantly, money. And in a time when their stock has lost a great deal of value over the last few months, why would they do anything to risk pushing it even lower? And why would they waste the money they don't need to by defending themselves in any kind of suit when they could save that money by not putting themselves in that kind of situation in the first place? The thing is that they (not only EA) are very very inexplicit (not sure if this is the right english word but i hope you get it) in their statements. To put it simply - they don't out right lie to get in trouble they just tell half the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synxos Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 For all we know,TOR could be making EA more than WoW makes Blizz, even if they have 10 times the subs TOR does. Way too many factors play into that, including how much of the profits go into future developments.. What?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celebrus Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 For all we know,TOR could be making EA more than WoW makes Blizz, even if they have 10 times the subs TOR does. Way too many factors play into that, including how much of the profits go into future developments. Just because WoW CAN invest more back into the game doesnt mean they do. For all we know, a kayote could be a walrus. Seriously though. It's pretty reasonable to assume that ToR isn't making EA anywhere near the kind of money that WoW is making Actiblizz. I don't think many people would try to argue that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kharnis Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 The thing is that they (not only EA) are very very inexplicit (not sure if this is the right english word but i hope you get it) in their statements. To put it simply - they don't out right lie to get in trouble they just tell half the truth. But that's my point (and "inexplicit" is exactly the right word, by the way). EA doesn't have to out right lie to get in trouble. All they need to do is stretch the truth just far enough, or even tell what someone feels is not even near half the truth. At that point, they run the risk of someone who is an investor getting on the phone to their lawyer. Would EA win? Probably. But they would be wasting money in doing so, when they wouldn't have to by doing something as simple as not reporting free trial or the free-to-play players as "active subscriptions." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pureeffinmetal Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 I think more likely when the numbers are announced 3 things will happen 1- Hater Drones will blow it out of proportion and spin it to their favour 2- Fanbois will defend anything and everything blindly even, and spin in their favour 3- Most people will log on and continue playing the game oblivious to any number, some will check the forums and not care either way and get back to playing the game while everyone else clashes over what it means exactly while adding Computer Chair Developer Insight, and waiting for the next round of numbers to come up so they can battle again. what this guy said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iggster Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Of course the next report will show more subs. Isn't it a cooncidence that the free trials are coming out soon? I can bet they'll be using those numbers in their report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norlof Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Best Buy has TOR on sale for 19.99. I would not bet any money on the subs having increased over the last report. I didn't realize best buy sales tell you whether a game is good or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts