The sky isn't falling. A numbers based view.

[Skirata_Kal]

Yes Tim, the sky is indeed falling! You obviously don't live here in the Pacific NW! We're getting dumped on here!

 

You make a very good case and present it well. There's not much denying that SWTOR is a success compared to most other MMO's (though it's like comparing a Corgi to chihuahuas with WoW as a Great Dane). Despite how disappointed I've been in SWTOR, it's only the second MMO in history to keep my interest for more than 2 months. It's been a couple of weeks since I've seriously logged in, but I still desire to finish the class stories so I keep popping back in.

 

With all that said, I still find it hard to put a positive spin on the sub losses, the dev departures and going f2p so relatively soon after Greg's remarks on the subject. I'll concede that much of it is opinion and perspective whereas you bring numbers. Your argument would be the more compelling one in a court of law, I'll concede (except perhaps that in a court of law we might could subpoena the actual figures as opposed to the vague '500k to 1 million lol).

[TrakonBazzaak]

I'm starting this thread as a place to discuss the state of the game while keeping things in perspective without employing excessive hyperbole to make my point. I hope it can generate a good discussion.

 

The Truth in Numbers

 

It is only fair to judge a game to it's direct competition. This is an attempt to do that based on the information available to us. After viewing the data we can then extrapolate from there.

 

This is the information we have to use in this endeavor. You can debate the validity of the info (some of it is dated) but it's all we have otherwise the debate is pointless and turns into an opinion based debate rather than a fact based one. There has to be a base foundation in which you can make a deduction. An updated chart is on the way and at that point we can reassess.

 

http://www.mmodata.net/

 

How many subscribers does SWTOR have? Per EA SWTOR has between 1 million and 500k. This number will be updated at the EA shareholders meeting at the end of the month. The human mind tends to latch onto the negative immediately when ever a projection is given. Depending on your POV you'll choose a number in that range that fits your mindset, however for these purposes the range itself is fine.

 

Since SWTOR does not have a eastern (China) based operation this is only a comparison of western players where the numbers allow the distinction to be made. Additionally games that do not have a subscription based model are not compared here. They do not release numbers of active accounts and having played the game only once you would be a subscriber for life essentially. While they can be compared for game play elements their financial models are completely different and not a part of the scope of this discussion.

 

 

Direct MMO competitors with a subscription or subscription + F2P model (Western Subscription numbers only):

 

World of Warcraft has ~5.1 million players

SWTOR has between 1mil-500k players.

Eve Online has ~350k players.

LOTOR has ~250k players.

Rift has ~250k players.

Star Trek Online has less than ~60k players.

SWG had under 30k players before the sunsetting announcement.

 

The outlier is of course WoW with over 6.5 million subs no surprise there. Otherwise SWTOR is solidly the industry number two when compared to it's peers with similar payment access models.

 

 

Retention, It's all about perspective

 

 

Immediately the focus then shifts to what about the subscription retention numbers? In order to give something weight it has to have a viable comparison. Next let's examine all of the MMOs with the same payment access model that have come on to the scene in the last 4 years. This comparison will start in 2008 because from 2008 to the present the market conditions and number of existing games illustrates the current market saturation of MMOs. Additionally 2008 represents the start of the rapid decline in the US economy. Not accounting for this would be illogical.

 

These will be based on a peak subscriptions number as high number for retention as box sales do not exist for all of these games specifically broken down to the first year sales. The comparison has to be equal for it to be worth considering. If actual date including box sales can be obtained this will be amended to show those numbers.

 

Retention Rate of Direct MMO competitors with a subscription or subscription + F2P model since 2008 over a 1 year period:

 

STO: 107k to 58k. (54% Retention Rate)

SWTOR: 1.7 million to 1 million- 500k. (59%-29% Retention Rate -Median is 45%)

RIFT: 600k to 248k. (41% Retention Rate)

Warhammer Online: 800k to 175k. (22% Retention Rate)

Age of Conan: 700k to 110k. (15% Retention Rate)

 

Clearly we can see the trend of newly released MMO's with a similar payment model has taken quite a hit since 2008. STO doesn't have a player base anywhere near the other games but has apparently carved out a loyal niche during their first year. SWTOR is on par with the average when compared with it's recently released peers. The new release of SWTOR subscription numbers next week will paint a better picture.

 

 

Summary and Conclusion

 

Based on the information presented we can draw several conclusions.

 

1. SWTOR is the #2 game in the MMO market when compared to other games with a Subscription or Subscription + F2P model.

 

2. SWTOR's subscription retention rate is typical of the trend all MMO's released within the last 4 years that share the same payment access model.

 

 

Having viewed the data the question is obvious, why does the gaming community that pays for SWTOR continue to tout it as a failure? Unrealistic expectations that the game would just go up and up and up in terms of subscription numbers. That trend isn't realistic based on the data.

 

Expectations are set by people. That is an important thing to consider. SWTOR isn't a living entity so the game itself never said it was going to be a WoW killer, you will not find a single interview prior to launch with anyone from Bioware stating they believed they had the next WoW killer on their hands. We set those expectations ourselves. Speculating on EA's motives is also pointless endeavor, as a business they internally have to hope any game they sell has blockbuster potential.

 

If SWTOR is a failure then all other games with the exception of WoW are failures as MMO's that use a subscription or subscription + F2P model. Objectively people may have expected more from the title in the first year but it performed on par with it's directly comparable competition.

 

If leveraged correctly SWTOR can increase it's #2 market share position with the F2P release. It is not unrealistic to expect growth going forward with this new model as the charts show the game that grew adopted the F2P service.

 

Change log:

10.26.12: Updated WoW's current subscriber numbers to reflect the chart referenced. I mistakenly pulled the China numbers originally.

 

 

**** I will gladly update and revise this based on any new or more reliable data that can be obtained. ****

 

 

Theres just one little thing you optimist hucksters are missing in your little celebration of 500k+ subscribers post.

 

Mr John Smedley:

 

"We have a contractual relationship that's ending in 2012, The Old Republic launching, a bunch of other business things with LucasArts. And then you look at the odds of a pretty large portion of the audience moving to TOR, which looks like a terrific game. ... That's the problem with licenses: they end. We're going to continue to do some licensed work, but we're largely going to stick to original IP [going forward] because then we won't have this issue. We'll never have this problem with EverQuest. Back in 2001, not '03 when we launched, but back in 2001 when we [first] negotiated it, a five year license seemed like a really long g****** time. EverQuest was only a year or so old at that point. Could we have renegotiated? Maybe, but I don't think that would be the right thing for the company."

 

 

You guys are completely forgetting the major deciding factor of whether this game will continue to run.

 

Is the profit made enough to show green each quarter, and more importantly does this number show green AFTER we pay the licensing fee to Lucas.

 

 

This is not an Electronic Arts IP.

 

So if they dont shape this game up soon, and stop bleeding subs, you have another few years of this game and thats it.

 

So I wouldn't get too attached to the items you buy in the cash shop lol.

 

I didnt want to make a prediction here, but after reading everyones lalalalalalala dancing through the forest "the game is doing great" posts I absolutely cannot stop myself.

 

2 possible outcomes.

 

1. Cash shop is a huge success, but numbers still fall due to boredom. EA adds content that doesnt involve operations, warzones or leveling. Game lives on through this licensing period and gains popularity.

 

2. Cash shop is a huge failure, People get bored of the easy content being released at a snails pace. EA doesnt hear the community, they do not add any horizontal progression, no mini games, they dont improve the static dead feel of the planets, they dont give lvl 50's any other reason to log into the game other than the 2 avenues of vertical progression, no reason to revisit planets. EA continues to drain what little they can out of a dwindling player base until they have to re license the ip, they do not because it doesnt make business sense.

 

If I had to choose which one will happen, I would go with option 2. Because EA's philosophy is

 

Why feed a pig cherries, when he will happily eat muck?

 

The few piggies left will at least provide some revenue, at very little cost to them.

 

Im not going to completely discount option 1 though.

 

In the end I have nothing but best wishes for this game. If it dies we wont see another Star Wars mmo until Im 40 or 50 years old if at all.

Edited October 26, 2012 by TrakonBazzaak

[chuixupu]

You are right about the license...I'm not sure how long they licensed SW for.

Pretty sure they knew what they were in for when they did, though.

 

As you said, it depends on how much profit they are still turning out when the license ends. At that point, if it's doing well but not well enough for EA to bother, we might end up seeing LA take it over.

[Liquidacid]

meh LL didn't pull SWG's IP license nor did Sony let it lapse even when it spend most of it's run on life support Edited October 26, 2012 by Liquidacid

[Tim-ONeil]

Except it's completely ignoring that the other SW game with the same restrictions lasted 8 years on a much much smaller player base.

 

Here's a good and honest interview to read if you are so inclined with John Smedley when the sunsetting announcement was made.

 

http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/06/24/exclusive-smedley-on-the-sunsetting-of-star-wars-galaxies/

[Thylbanus]

Tim, while discussing you have fallen into your own trap which you sited:

 

Depending on your POV you'll choose a number in that range that fits your mindset...

 

And your choice of numbers includes this.

 

Direct MMO competitors with a subscription or subscription + F2P model (Western Subscription numbers only):

 

World of Warcraft has ~5.1 million players

SWTOR has between 1mil-500k players.

Eve Online has ~350k players.

LOTOR has ~250k players.

Rift has ~250k players.

Star Trek Online has less than ~60k players.

SWG had under 30k players before the sunsetting announcement.

 

STO: 107k to 58k. (54% Retention Rate)

SWTOR: 1.7 million to 1 million- 500k. (59%-29% Retention Rate -Median is 45%)

RIFT: 600k to 248k. (41% Retention Rate)

Warhammer Online: 800k to 175k. (22% Retention Rate)

Age of Conan: 700k to 110k. (15% Retention Rate)

 

Notable omissions are both lists are DDO and Aion. A notable inclusion that is pointless: SWG. It's dead. Don't resurrect it. WoW, EVE, and LotRO was not included in the retention rate figures. So my contention is that you are cherry picking to fit your own POV. Not including the Asian numbers is another way to cherry pick. You contend that we have to discuss relative numbers. Well, for EA not to have the foresight to project into the Asian market is a failing of the company and to that point makes market equality irrelevant to the discussion.

 

WoW 300k to 10 million. (3333%)

EVE 25k to 350k (1400%)

Aion 500k to 2.5 million [Active accounts]. (500%)

DDO 65k to 110k. (169%)

LotRO 150k to 250k. (166%)

 

So that puts SWTOR solidly in 7th place out of 10. Not impressive.

 

I say this, as you often site, using the numbers available. While MMOData.net has the most up to date numbers in one spot, they are still quite dated. Ibe said he was going to update the numbers back in May, but has not done so yet. So you are working with numbers that are almost 9 months old. The last time they were updated was on March 11, 2012. I would also like to point out that the subscibers to STO sited as 58k has not been updated in almost a year and a half.

 

Trying to control the direction of commentary is another way to cherry pick. You cannot bring up the past without talking about what the future will hold. Read it, discuss it in context, debate the fine points, but don't dismiss it. I've read some very fine points, some not so fine, and some downright troll worthy. But ignoring it doens't make it go away.

 

What we know is that SWTOR launched with 1.7 million, lost 400k after it's first quarter, the second quarter didn't bode well in that they lost another 400k subs, rough that in and you have 900k subs. Projecting the curve means that it should level out to between 200k - 300k loss. One can contend that with all the ire and rage going on in the Customer Service forum, we will see the greater. Either way, we are looking at 600k to 700k subs, and Frank Gibeau did reinforce the statement that 500k sub rate as a break even point in the EA Q1 FY13 Prepared Comments on July 31, 2012. So this puts them too close for comfort to the red line.

 

If you look at EA's quarterly reports in the slideshows, SWTOR and it's logos are notably absent from the slides. This begs the question: are they trying to distance themselves from the game? Only in the prepared statements do they even mention it. Lucas Arts President Paul Meegan also reigned in all Lucas Arts IPs so that they will not be produced outside Lucas Arts. So this will be the last Star Wars MMO not done exclusively by Lucsa Arts. Did SWG and SWTOR play into that decision? Only they know for certain. All this amounts to a not as sunny a rendition of your OP. Things ARE bad. Not game ending bad, but bad. There could be a sunny future, but it will take time.

 

Thanks,

Chicken Little

Edited October 26, 2012 by Thylbanus

[Tim-ONeil]

Thylbanus:

 

SWG is compared to make a point about it's actual subscription numbers vs the amount of praise it receives on these forums. Additionally being a star wars game not having the numbers would seem incomplete. The rest of the compared games are not only of the same sub model but the ones that people in these forums bring up when they talk about other game play designs.

 

I've already discussed why Aion is not included. It is not a sub or a sub+FTP model. There is no sub at all. It is not an equal comparison in that regard. This is the same reason the GW2 will never be discussed here.

 

This is a discussion of SWTOR vs it's peers with the same subscription models. Not SWTOR vs all games that are MMO's though you are welcomed to start that analysis.

 

My goal was to look at recent launch comparisons from 2008 and newer with equal sub models for the reasons that I describe in my post which I believe accurately represent the MMO market as it exists today.

 

Trying to compare WoW at launch to SWTOR at launch is a useless endeavor and I hope you can understand the reasons why. Wow caught lightning in a bottle and much of this was due to the market factors existing when it was released- to say nothing of the game play itself which was certainly different at the time.

 

It is because things are NOT equal in this context that comparisons should be made where possible under as close to equal circumstances as you can obtain or the data has little meaning.

[cidtheslayer]

People either forget or don't realise that most of Warcraft's subscription numbers are hourly subscriptions. In the Eastern market its common to pay for access by the hour instead of monthly.

 

Doing a monthly subscription comparison puts Warcraft's subs much closer to between 900K and 1.5million based on figures I saw around the Cataclysm.

[Tim-ONeil]

People either forget or don't realise that most of Warcraft's subscription numbers are hourly subscriptions. In the Eastern market its common to pay for access by the hour instead of monthly.

 

Doing a monthly subscription comparison puts Warcraft's subs much closer to between 900K and 1.5million based on figures I saw around the Cataclysm.

 

The numbers I used are western only (last reported at least). It should be substantially higher 1.5 million.

[Liquidacid]

of course the sky isn't falling ... THE GROUND IS RISING!!!!!!!!!

[Thylbanus]

Thylbanus:

 

SWG is compared to make a point about it's actual subscription numbers vs the amount of praise it receives on these forums. Additionally being a star wars game not having the numbers would seem incomplete. The rest of the compared games are not only of the same sub model but the ones that people in these forums bring up when they talk about other game play designs.

 

I've already discussed why Aion is not included. It is not a sub or a sub+FTP model. There is no sub at all. It is not an equal comparison in that regard. This is the same reason the GW2 will never be discussed here.

 

That is why I edited the number for Aion to point out that it is active accounts, i.e. accounts that are still playing every 30 days or less. That is why I contend that you are cherry picking. Even removing Aion, that is still 6th place in 9.

 

This is a discussion of SWTOR vs it's peers with the same subscription models. Not SWTOR vs all games that are MMO's though you are welcomed to start that analysis.

 

My goal was to look at recent launch comparisons from 2008 and newer with equal sub models for the reasons that I describe in my post which I believe accurately represent the MMO market as it exists today.

 

Trying to compare WoW at launch to SWTOR at launch is a useless endeavor and I hope you can understand the reasons why. Wow caught lightning in a bottle and much of this was due to the market factors existing when it was released- to say nothing of the game play itself which was certainly different at the time.

 

It is because things are NOT equal in this context that comparisons should be made where possible under as close to equal circumstances as you can obtain or the data has little meaning.

 

Well then why include WoW into the numbers then? You reinforce my point that you are cherry picking, since by definition you can get any result you want by limiting the time frame. To contend they caught lightning in a bottle is ludicrous. They got what they have because they worked for it. There were many comparable games that could have done the same thing, but didn't. If you want to discuss this, I suggest you limit the time frame to the first year of launch for the contenders in the arena.

 

First year numbers:

WoW 300k to 6 mil (2000%)

LotRO 150k to 250k (167%)

DDO 65k to 50k (77%)

STO 106k to 68k (64%)

SWTOR 1.7 mil to 900k (53%)

Warhammer Online 500k to 175k (35%)

Rift 600k to 100k (17%)

AoCU 700k to 100k (14%)

 

That would be a relative comparison. That still puts SWTOR in 5th out of 8. The top of the bottom half, if you want to be optimistic about it. Since it is split down the middle, what company would you want to keep? WoW, LotRO, DDO, and STO? Or SWTOR, WAR, Rift, and AoCU? Can you understand why people consider that it is in the failing catagory?

 

Oh, and for comparison purposes, SWG 125k to 300k (240%). So is this a failing of the IP or the game designer? The fact remains this game was over-hyped, unsupported, and without vision. EA was so enamoured with itself that they failed to sagaciously assess the battleground on to which they entered and it shows. The fact that the game launched with 1.7 million is a testament to the IP. Those that stay by years end will be a testament to the game itself.

 

EDIT: And is it wrong to have some trepidation when the man who helmed WAR is now at the helm of SWTOR?

Edited October 27, 2012 by Thylbanus

[Thylbanus]

People either forget or don't realise that most of Warcraft's subscription numbers are hourly subscriptions. In the Eastern market its common to pay for access by the hour instead of monthly.

 

Doing a monthly subscription comparison puts Warcraft's subs much closer to between 900K and 1.5million based on figures I saw around the Cataclysm.

 

In that light, amend my statement to:

 

WoW 250k to 2 mil (800%) [West]

Edited October 27, 2012 by Thylbanus

[AboB]

GREAT THREAD.

 

Poor debaters.

 

Edited October 27, 2012 by AboB

[Heimskringla]

Considering the budget that TOR had compared to the MMOs you've chosen to highlight as competitors, TOR was a failure. It was a critical success but a general flop with fans. EAWare did not expect TOR to have under 1 million active subs at this point in its life.

 

The sky isn't falling, but an asteroid did knock up a little dust. The sky will fall if f2p isn't successful enough by whatever metrics EAWare has decided.

 

Lucas's licensing fees are pretty hefty compared to the other IPs discussed in the OP, too.

[Kaonis]

54% retention? Man it must be fun to not know numbers!

 

They gave us the number 2.1-2.4 million or so for people who outright bought the game. I think it's a fair estimate to say we're at about 700k players now. That means the game has a retention factor of only 30%. Regardless the game had one of the largest releases of an MMO ever, and very fast and sharply dropped off. 50% of the population quitting in several months I think alone is enough to evaluate the state of the game. And that state is poor.

 

The game is seeing only continuous decline and no new bodies joining in. People who had any sort of inclination to play the game seriously got it in the first few months, and judging from the numbers they had no inclination to stay. People quit for various reasons, and BW has done nothing significant to the game except continue to keep it a WoW clone with buggy patches.

 

The bottom line is the game had a great start, they dropped the ball, and they lost A LOT of players. You need no other games to compare it to, if you have a 50% lose of players in a few months, then something is wrong and the game is NOT a resounding success.

[Mallorik]

Wow doesnt need to fall for another mmo to rise, Someday another mmo will be made by someone who doesnt have their heads stuck up their A#%es and it will do well. Wow was not the only mmo out when it was released, EQ was and many games tried to dethrone Eq before wow and failed miserably, Daoc and Swg to name a couple.

 

Then wow was released and it did ok, but it wasnt the hit it would soon become, it was turned into that hit over time. spending 300 million on a game that is mechanicly where your competition was 9 years ago when they released and expecting it to crush that competiton is not a very smart buisness model.

 

Someday someone who knows how to budget a video game, how to run an mmo and knows that there are just certain industry standard game mechanics you cannot leave out of a modern mmo will make a game and it will eventually catch wow.(but it will most likely be run by blizzard }

 

I think Rift is on that track now, after making the same mistakes bw made with swtor trion quickly fixed their oversight and have continued to improve the game at a very quick pace, two things bw has unfortunately not done with swtor.

[metalfenix]

I hope the sky doesn't fall, at least until january, I've just bought and used a gametime card on my account today.

[Thylbanus]

54% retention? Man it must be fun to not know numbers!

 

They gave us the number 2.1-2.4 million or so for people who outright bought the game. I think it's a fair estimate to say we're at about 700k players now. That means the game has a retention factor of only 30%. Regardless the game had one of the largest releases of an MMO ever, and very fast and sharply dropped off. 50% of the population quitting in several months I think alone is enough to evaluate the state of the game. And that state is poor.

 

The game is seeing only continuous decline and no new bodies joining in. People who had any sort of inclination to play the game seriously got it in the first few months, and judging from the numbers they had no inclination to stay. People quit for various reasons, and BW has done nothing significant to the game except continue to keep it a WoW clone with buggy patches.

 

The bottom line is the game had a great start, they dropped the ball, and they lost A LOT of players. You need no other games to compare it to, if you have a 50% lose of players in a few months, then something is wrong and the game is NOT a resounding success.

 

Well that means is they sold 2.1 mil to 2.4 mil games to retailers, not people. Only 1.7 mil subs at launch, that is the highest point, it's been down hill from there. So that means that some of those remaining 400k to 700k boxes were either sold later after some had already dropped their subs, were lost or destroyed, or in some other way not used. So it is 1.7 mil. And going by reported numbers, not by conjecture or supposition is how the percentage was reached. That number was taken by subtracting the 800k loss (two consecutive quarters of 400k losses) from the launch number of 1.7 mil, or 900k. I'm willing to bet 700k is about right, but that is just supposition and that has been excluded in the framework of Tim's discussion.

 

I hate to come to EA's defence, they have done something significant to generate income and that is by going F2P. Turbine has shown that it has lead to great success with LotRO and DDO. Sure Turbine just went through a layoff, but that is expected when you put out a major expansion. They simply don't need that amount of people to run the game once it's been shipped. It's like seasonal help for developers.

 

Believe me, I agree that this game has flopped, but don't skew numbers to make things seem worse than they are. We will know for sure in 3+ days where the subscription rate is.

Edited October 27, 2012 by Thylbanus

[Grayseven]

Please state your sources for the numbers you are throwing out there...

 

After all, 99% of all statistics are made up on the spot. Without references to your sources, those numbers are just made up.

 

Ultimately, however, the game is playable. There is a large enough population on the consolidated servers to easily do whatever it is you want to do in game. By that perspective alone, the game is alive. All that is left is to continue watching to see if it thrives or stagnates.

[Thylbanus]

Please state your sources for the numbers you are throwing out there...

 

After all, 99% of all statistics are made up on the spot. Without references to your sources, those numbers are just made up.

 

Ultimately, however, the game is playable. There is a large enough population on the consolidated servers to easily do whatever it is you want to do in game. By that perspective alone, the game is alive. All that is left is to continue watching to see if it thrives or stagnates.

 

There are links to in my previous posts.

And it's 74% of statistics are made up on the spot.

[BlazingShadow]

Why do I get the feeling that we are under 500k by the end of Oct?

[Grayseven]

There are links to in my previous posts.

And it's 74% of statistics are made up on the spot.

 

You made that up.

 

Must have missed the source links while skimming through the chaff posts.

[Uluain]

Why do I get the feeling that we are under 500k by the end of Oct?

 

I have no idea, considering we are still seeing new players every day on Begeren Colony. Maybe you just like drama?

[odericko]

Good post. For all the hate SWTOR gets, it's retention rate is pretty good compared to a large majority of other AAA MMO's that were released the past few years.

[Thylbanus]

You made that up.

 

Must have missed the source links while skimming through the chaff posts.

 

It's OK. My mind went numb between pages 8 and 16, too.