Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I understand...I'm somebody. In fact, I bet EVERYBODY here understands that anything done in SWTOR costs time, energy and money...who exactly do you think doesn't realize that? Seriously, people don't understand how it applies to the business of making decisions. I am sure people know that doing anything takes physical energy. The point is, they don't understand that in the real world (aka real life) that time and energy has to be justified by an ROI. People, and businesses, don't work for free. Or did you decide to cherry pick a statement when you missed the point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Seriously, people don't understand how it applies to the business of making decisions. I am sure people know that doing anything takes physical energy. The point is, they don't understand that in the real world (aka real life) that time and energy has to be justified by an ROI. People, and businesses, don't work for free. Or did you decide to cherry pick a statement when you missed the point? I didn't cherry pick anything...I stopped reading at such a ridiculous assertion though and clarified it for you since you assume you're the only one who gets it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dscount Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) The vocal forum goers make broad, sweeping statements trying to equate what they see with their eyes to internal processes. Its ridiculous and there is no convincing some of the most vocal forum users that real life is different than their assumptions. No one understands that anything done in SWTOR costs time, energy and money. And if you apply those to a game you better have an ROI to justify it. Spoiler Alert: Video game companies exist for ONE soul purpose, to make money. I don't think anyone is in disagreement. It takes money to make money... Got it.It takes time to develop and delivery content with an ROi attached... Got it. (I think everyone agrees on that)Tools Exist today for SWTOR development... Got it. (you seemed to disagree, then changed your mind?)EA/BW is in it for MONEY... Got it.To GROW the game organically they need more players... You don't seem to get that.To get more players they need more content or more shiny content to bring in NEW or OLD players again. That comes with INVESTING MONEY/TIME from BW/EA... You don't seem to get that part.ATM - BW/EA is making BANK with CM and F2P model (Go look up yourself I'm not going to link all those records).ATM - BW/EA could be using some of that to MAKE more content (I'm sure the new stuff in FALL is part of that). Truth is NOBODY but BW/EA knows. Bottom Line: Why are you not getting these points? Everyone seems to agree it appears to me. Content is still taking 1 YEAR+ to deploy. (I'm not going to stop bringing that up BTW) Partly related to funding of said content and partly related (I suspect) to the use of the complex HERO Engine that does require extra planning/working with to make even simple changes. (GO Google Jobs for Hero Engine Developers - They exist) Edited February 26, 2014 by dscount Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I didn't cherry pick anything...I stopped reading at such a ridiculous assertion though and clarified it for you since you assume you're the only one who gets it. And I still assume that myself and a few other are the only ones who get it. If we weren't, we wouldn't have absurd and ridiculous requests from people to "add sandbox features" and "overhaul the engine". Some of us get it. Probably those of us who actually have had to run projects and actually make decisions at a strategic business level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicKat Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I understand...I'm somebody. In fact, I bet EVERYBODY here understands that anything done in SWTOR costs time, energy and money...who exactly do you think doesn't realize that? They think since TOR cost $200 million (allegedly) to make, that changing anything in it would also cost $100's of millions. You know... like it cost Honda billions to design a Civic, so naturally changing the oil in yours would also cost billions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khevar Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I can buy that for building landscapes. I'm not sure if I buy that for building anything that requires scripting, like boss fights in flash points and operations. ... Things like scripting and such do require knowledge of coding, at least in whatever scripting language is used in the game being modded. But surely you know that most successful modding teams have both 3D artists AND coders. In fact, some of the modders actually write software as a day job, but do modding on the side just because they like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 They think since TOR cost $200 million (allegedly) to make, that changing anything in it would also cost $100's of millions. You know... like it cost Honda billions to design a Civic, so naturally changing the oil in yours would also cost billions. Nope, wrong again. All investment, whether $1 or $100,000 must have an ROI to justify it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Nope, wrong again. All investment, whether $1 or $100,000 must have an ROI to justify it. So...do you think MORE content wouldn't bring in MORE revenue? Do you think the game is dying that fast? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 So...do you think MORE content wouldn't bring in MORE revenue? Do you think the game is dying that fast? Of course it would. That is why more content is coming. It was justified as a significant ROI. So what is this about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Of course it would. That is why more content is coming. It was justified as a significant ROI. So what is this about? Lemme ask you this question...do you think faster releases of BIGGER content (Ops, WZ's, FPs) would increase or decrease the subscriber base? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khevar Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Nope, wrong again. All investment, whether $1 or $100,000 must have an ROI to justify it. Now, take what I'm about to say with a grain of salt, as it's coming from an ivory-tower perspective of someone who has no idea how difficult it is to code out new content for the SW:TOR engine. But with that disclaimer out of the way, I believe that it would be possible to spend money to either hire (or farm out work to) multiple dedicated teams of modelers, texture artists, writers, scripters, etc. Working on planets, warzones, flashpoints, operations, etc. I also believe that doing this, organized correctly, would produce more content faster than any other MMO out there. Perhaps faster than any other MMO has ever done. Would this ever be enough to satisfy the so-called "content locusts"? Of course not. But I do believe that it would be possible to accelerate the content release schedule so much that it would result in: 1. Many more players returning to the game to see the new stuff. 2. Much more press about the game, resulting in new interest. 3. Many more people subbing for the game, and/or 4. Many more people spending money in the CM. With the potential for an excellent ROI. Edited February 26, 2014 by Khevar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Lemme ask you this question...do you think faster releases of BIGGER content (Ops, WZ's, FPs) would increase or decrease the subscriber base? I can't possibly answer that factually because its a loaded question. Its like saying if I have more money in my pocket do I have more money in my pocket? Yes, obviously I have more money. The important question to ask is...does the additional cost of adding more staff for content releases justify any (if even possible) increase in subs. That is the real question. Edited February 26, 2014 by Arkerus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthTHC Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Lemme ask you this question...do you think faster releases of BIGGER content (Ops, WZ's, FPs) would increase or decrease the subscriber base? Faster releases of more content would probably increase the subscriber base. The question is, would it increase the subscriber base by enough to make the additional expenditure profitable? That's a much harder question to answer because we don't know the team size to content capacity ratio. But I don't really need to know that. I can know how EA behaves and deduce the answer from that knowledge and my observations of their behavior. Knowing that EA loves them some profitable revenue, if they thought it would increase profitability, they would do it. If they don't do it, they, being much closer to understanding that team size to content capacity ratio than we will ever be, must not believe it will increase the subscriber base enough to increase profitability. Edited February 26, 2014 by DarthTHC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Faster releases of more content would probably increase the subscriber base. The question is, would it increase the subscriber base by enough to make the additional expenditure profitable? That's a much harder question to answer because we don't know the team size to content capacity ratio. But I don't really need to know that. I can know how EA behaves and deduce the answer from that knowledge and my observations of their behavior. Knowing that EA loves them some profitable revenue, if they thought it would increase profitability, they would do it. If they don't do it, they, being much closer to understanding that team size to content capacity ratio than we will ever be, must not believe it will increase the subscriber base enough to increase profitability. lol. Literally back to back responses on the exact same point. Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I can't possibly answer that factually because its a loaded question. Its like saying if I have more money in my pocket do I have more money in my pocket? Yes, obviously I have more money. The important question to ask is...does the additional cost of adding more staff for content releases justify any (if even possible) increase in subs. That is the real question. True. We have no way of knowing...which boggles my mind in a way. EA can predict sales of a new Madden or FIFA yearly, but they seem unable to understand how stale MMO content gets in a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Now, take what I'm about to say with a grain of salt, as it's coming from an ivory-tower perspective of someone who has no idea how difficult it is to code out new content for the SW:TOR engine. But with that disclaimer out of the way, I believe that it would be possible to spend money to either hire (or farm out work to) multiple dedicated teams of modelers, texture artists, writers, scripters, etc. Working on planets, warzones, flashpoints, operations, etc. I also believe that doing this, organized correctly, would produce more content faster than any other MMO out there. Perhaps faster than any other MMO has ever done. Would this ever be enough to satisfy the so-called "content locusts"? Of course not. But I do believe that it would be possible to accelerate the content release schedule so much that it would result in: 1. Many more players returning to the game to see the new stuff. 2. Much more press about the game, resulting in new interest. 3. Many more people subbing for the game, and/or 4. Many more people spending money in the CM. With the potential for an excellent ROI. Trust me when I say that if any of that works, and had a high ROI, they would be doing it. Farm out and the like is very normal in today's world. If ROI justifies the project, it happens. Very rarely do companies have negative ROI but they may do it on a product line, simply to attach other positive ROI projects to it. e.g. The XBOX sold at a loss just so M$ could make money off of every other tech and licensing fee attached to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicKat Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I can't possibly answer that factually because its a loaded question. Its like saying if I have more money in my pocket do I have more money in my pocket? Yes, obviously I have more money. The important question to ask is...does the additional cost of adding more staff for content releases justify any (if even possible) increase in subs. That is the real question. Given EA's ROI guesses (and all ROI's are guesses) on TOR in the first place, they need to hire a new magic 8 ball. They tanked harder than any other MMO in history, given their Investment and the Return On said investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 The question is, would it increase the subscriber base by enough to make the additional expenditure profitable? That's a much harder question to answer because we don't know the team size to content capacity ratio. Huh...think they used those same criteria when they developed GSF? I only know 3 guys (myself included) who actually LIKE GSF. Makes me wonder is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 True. We have no way of knowing...which boggles my mind in a way. EA can predict sales of a new Madden or FIFA yearly, but they seem unable to understand how stale MMO content gets in a year. I can only wonder that they were overly optimistic about their content and undervalued how fast people get through it. That was then though...and this is now. I have been pretty satisfied with the content and features we are getting. If not, I would have left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I can only wonder that they were overly optimistic about their content and undervalued how fast people get through it. That was then though...and this is now. I have been pretty satisfied with the content and features we are getting. If not, I would have left. If this were December 2013, I'd agree with you. The end of 2013 was AMAZING imo...but 2014 is off to a sluggish and abysmal start imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khevar Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Trust me when I say that if any of that works, and had a high ROI, they would be doing it. Farm out and the like is very normal in today's world. If ROI justifies the project, it happens. Very rarely do companies have negative ROI but they may do it on a product line, simply to attach other positive ROI projects to it. e.g. The XBOX sold at a loss just so M$ could make money off of every other tech and licensing fee attached to it. The only reason I have a hard time trusting you on this is because I have seen the opposite happen so many times. For example, I've seen the Board of Directors of a $500 million company hire a new Senior VP Sales, who then went on to fire all the highest producing salesman, and bring on a new crowd of young people (that thought just like him), who then proceeded to drive the company into the ground, so the Board "let him go" with a $2 million severance package by way of a "thank you for *********** up our company". Edited February 26, 2014 by Khevar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Given EA's ROI guesses (and all ROI's are guesses) on TOR in the first place, they need to hire a new magic 8 ball. They tanked harder than any other MMO in history, given their Investment and the Return On said investment. Oh they did? Hm. Strange...their revenue looks good now. Not too bad for "tanking", as you say. The hyperbole is neat though. Please produce their exact investment figures and exact ROI figures. I'll be waiting. All we can go from now is the factual investor reports we get quarterly. Edited February 26, 2014 by Arkerus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 The only reason I have a hard time trusting you on this is because I have seen the opposite happen so many times. For example, I've seen the Board of Directors of a $500 million company hire a new Senior VP Sales, who then went on to fire all the highest producing salesman, and bring on a new crowd of young people (that thought just like him), who then proceeded to drive the company into the ground, so the Board "let him go" with a $2 million severance package by way of a "thank you for *********** up our company". Trusting me on what? What I am talking about is investment 101. Its taught in basic finance across the country. I'm not joking. This is basic stuff. It has nothing to do with a company making a terrible decision in hiring an awful VP of sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicKat Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Trusting me on what? What I am talking about is investment 101. Its taught in basic finance across the country. I'm not joking. This is basic stuff. It has nothing to do with a company making a terrible decision in hiring an awful VP of sales. Schools do not teach reality. They teach you how academics, with no experience in reality, think reality works. This is also why children think they are smarter than their parents. The child knows calculus, the parent knows the only reason you need to know calculus is to get out of school and into the real world where virtually nobody not working for NASA needs to know calculus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthTHC Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Huh...think they used those same criteria when they developed GSF? I only know 3 guys (myself included) who actually LIKE GSF. Makes me wonder is all. I have an entire guild full - one of the biggest on my server - that plays GSF daily. Just goes to show you that individual player experience is varied therefore we can't form reasonable conclusions upon our anecdotal evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts