SW:TOR 4th biggest Sub MMO in the world

[AshlaBoga]

Yeah, it's too bad they, Bioware, a division of Electronic Arts, which has been producing video games since 1982, have no idea where they could possibly look for "skilled" developers...maybe over time they'll build up their "skilled" contacts list, but right now, in this booming economy, I'm sure all the skilled people are busy on the next blockbuster game.

 

If there current team is 30 people (if you include the marketing/community staff) is that about average for an mmo after launch?

[LordArtemis]

Sorry, but I call BS.

 

Prior to the CU in SWG, the sub numbers stagnated, and started to fall. That's what caused the panic and the CU, compounded by the NGE after which was done when they realized no one wants to play a full sandbox with no story and what amounted to a glorified Star Wars dress up game.

 

You can call BS if you like. The proof to the contrary has been posted multiple times. One can choose to refuse to accept the truth, or simply search for the truth themselves.

 

So I encourage everyone to seek out the sub numbers before and after the CU/NGE was released. You will discover that I am correct....subs hovered around 250 to 300k until they plummeted AFTER the CU/NGE was released.

 

Now, does that mean that other factors did not hurt SWG? Of course not...A game was released that grabbed millions of players when SWG couldnt do better than 300k...if that doesn't say limited appeal I don't know what does.

 

But the game was killed by the CU/NGE IMO. And that was clearly added to the game in an attempt to obtain WoW like numbers....which the devs eventually admitted to.

 

Again, all of this is public record. I encourage anyone to seek out the information themselves.

Edited July 23, 2014 by LordArtemis

[Kunda]

Where did he say he did that? He was just quoting his dad... But I agree it's quite silly to be insulting yourself like that, Kunda.

 

If he's insinuating playing a game you dislike is the equivalent of drinking urine, and he continues to play said game....

 

Woosh?

[Reno_Tarshil]

You can call BS if you like. The proof to the contrary has been posted multiple times. One can choose to refuse to accept the truth, or simply search for the truth themselves.

 

So I encourage everyone to seek out the sub numbers before and after the CU/NGE was released. You will discover that I am correct....subs hovered around 250 to 300k until they plummeted AFTER the CU/NGE was released.

 

Now, does that mean that other factors did not hurt SWG? Of course not...A game was released that grabbed millions of players when SWG couldnt do better than 300k...if that doesn't say limited appeal I don't know what does.

 

But the game was killed by the CU/NGE IMO. And that was clearly added to the game in an attempt to obtain WoW like numbers....which the devs eventually admitted to.

 

Again, all of this is public record. I encourage anyone to seek out the information themselves.

 

Could you please post a link with some numbers, not shure what to google for I typed swg sub numbers pre and post CU and didn't get anything.

[Reno_Tarshil]

If he's insinuating playing a game you dislike is the equivalent of drinking urine, and he continues to play said game....

 

Woosh?

 

He was referring to other users and not himself.

 

Woosh?

[LordArtemis]

Could you please post a link with some numbers, not shure what to google for I typed swg sub numbers pre and post CU and didn't get anything.

 

Sure, here you go. There is more information out there, I encourage anyone to seek the information themselves and make up their own minds.

 

http://oi59.tinypic.com/296g18w.jpg

 

And my comments...use the graph as a reference to verify what I have written here for yourselves....

 

Game peaked shortly after launch, mid 2003 at 300k subs.

Game lost 25k subs by early 2004, and hovered back and forth around 250k to 275k subs with the release of JTL late 2004. Not a sub hemorrhage by any definition of the word IMO.

The CU came in early 2005 and caused subs to plummet below 200k. Before then subs had stabilized around 250k.

Subs rebounded late 2005 to around 230k subs with the announcement of NGE, but then started a spiral to the bottom after a dismal reception.

By mid to late 2006 SWG had bled from 70k to 120k in subs, to just above 100k subs after the middle of the year. Losses slowed to a more stable population until late 2007, from where (it is assumed, since Sony stopped releasing sub numbers at this point) the losses continued at a steady rate until the game closed in 2012.

 

...all facts that can be easily verified by official sources and those that compiled the subscriber reports from the actual official statements released by SOE. The graph, official statements, statements from actual devs involved in the game AND financial reports all clearly indicate conclusions and postulations that the CU and NGE came about because they were losing subs are simply fallacious.

Edited July 23, 2014 by LordArtemis

[Kunda]

He was referring to other users and not himself.

 

While playing the same game. Come on now, white knight, he's using the equivalent of "get a life" while doing the same activity.

[Reno_Tarshil]

Sure, here you go. There is more information out there, I encourage anyone to seek the information themselves and make up their own minds.

 

http://oi59.tinypic.com/296g18w.jpg

 

And my comments...use the graph as a reference to verify what I have written here for yourselves....

 

Game peaked shortly after launch, mid 2003 at 300k subs.

Game lost 25k subs by early 2004, and hovered back and forth around 250k to 275k subs with the release of JTL late 2004. Not a sub hemorrhage by any definition of the word IMO.

The CU came in early 2005 and caused subs to plummet below 200k. Before then subs had stabilized around 250k.

Subs rebounded late 2005 to around 230k subs with the announcement of NGE, but then started a spiral to the bottom after a dismal reception.

By mid to late 2006 SWG had bled from 70k to 120k in subs, to just above 100k subs after the middle of the year. Losses slowed to a more stable population until late 2007, from where (it is assumed, since Sony stopped releasing sub numbers at this point) the losses continued at a steady rate until the game closed in 2012.

 

...all facts that can be easily verified by official sources and those that compiled the subscriber reports from the actual official statements released by SOE. The graph, official statements, statements from actual devs involved in the game AND financial reports all clearly indicate conclusions and postulations that the CU and NGE came about because they were losing subs are simply fallacious.

 

Thanks, your comments certainly match up with the chart you provided

[Kunda]

Sure, here you go. There is more information out there, I encourage anyone to seek the information themselves and make up their own minds.

 

http://oi59.tinypic.com/296g18w.jpg

 

I wish I could find that Dan Rubenfeld (sp) piece but it looks like his blog/site isn't functional any longer. Can only find excerpts.

 

So we were given the directive to make Galaxies better.

 

Not just make Galaxies better, but make it succesful. Not the 200k subs it had, but really succesful. The idea was that we had the most valuable IP in the entire world, and we ****ed it up to the point of

having 200k subs.

 

So, when the NGE push came along, we were asked to reimagine the game.

 

Not just small changes, but rebuild it.

 

And it was needed. When we were asked, we were bleeding subscribers.

 

If I remember correctly, somewhere around 10k a month. LOSING 10,000

subs a month.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Kunda

[LordArtemis]

I do have the quotes from the devs over time, about half a dozen that speak to the idea that they added the CU/NGE to capture WoW like numbers, and the one comment that contradicts that from a dev I believe.

 

That one comment, about the game "bleeding subs" is the reason folks cling to that idea. I pose that that comment was dishonest, clearly so. Since that time the person that made the comment indicated it was taken out of context.

 

But the myth still prevails to this day.

 

Edit....I see someone else found the guilty quote that started it all. If you look at the chart, you clearly see the game had far more than 200k subs, and was NOT losing 10k subs a month.

 

The numbers say something different. This was an excuse at best, a flat out lie at worst.

Edited July 23, 2014 by LordArtemis

[Reno_Tarshil]

While playing the same game. Come on now, white knight, he's using the equivalent of "get a life" while doing the same activity.

 

First off, stop the labeling, it doesn't help you at all.

 

Secondly, you're still not getting it, he is referring to other players who do that, not himself.

[Kunda]

Secondly, you're still not getting it, he is referring to other players who do that, not himself.

 

My sub is up in a month and that's it for me.

 

Is this not stating he's going to play it for another month? I get that folks want to make use of their hard earned 15 dollars, but if you're going to make a hyperbolic statement that playing is the equivalent of drinking urine I'd think you'd be done playing period.

 

He's referring to himself.

[Reno_Tarshil]

Is this not stating he's going to play it for another month? I get that folks want to make use of their hard earned 15 dollars, but if you're going to make a hyperbolic statement that playing is the equivalent of drinking urine I'd think you'd be done playing period.

 

He's referring to himself.

 

Nope.

[Tsillah]

Is this not stating he's going to play it for another month? I get that folks want to make use of their hard earned 15 dollars, but if you're going to make a hyperbolic statement that playing is the equivalent of drinking urine I'd think you'd be done playing period.

 

He's referring to himself.

 

He's saying his sub runs out in a month, he might've been on a 3-month sub rotation for all we know, but he is clearly stating his sub is running out or in other words he's not renewing it. Clearly he's quitting the game.

 

And he's not using hyperbole really. Apparently it's a quote of his dad which is clearly not to be taken literally but more as a metaphor that is used to indicate that if you wrap it up nice enough people will buy just about anything.

 

Whether you share that view is a matter of opinion. There is a difference between something being crap and thinking something is crap of course. I am bored with this game at the moment but I don't call the game crap. I just think the release of new actual content has just slowed down to a pace that tests more people's patience than before.

[LordArtemis]

Boy, some of you guys are working pretty hard to convince others he is talking about drinking urine.

 

I'm going to guess that not only is that not the intent, it is not the meaning of the saying. What is implied is obvious. If you have to work this hard to poke fun at someone, it's likely it misfired IMO.

[Darth_Wicked]

Boy, some of you guys are working pretty hard to convince others he is talking about drinking urine. (...)

 

They're still discussing that? Force behold...!!!

[ZionHalcyon]

Thanks, your comments certainly match up with the chart you provided

 

That's no mystery. What is a mystery is where he got that. Pardon me, but in this Photoshop-laden world, I want to see the original source, not someone's copy on tinypic.

[LordArtemis]

That's no mystery. What is a mystery is where he got that. Pardon me, but in this Photoshop-laden world, I want to see the original source, not someone's copy on tinypic.

 

Ah, so you would accuse me of dishonesty. Indirectly perhaps.

 

Well, I suppose you can do that if you like. The source of the information in that graphic is, again, public knowledge. Convincing you is not my goal. Convincing others to seek the truth is.

 

However, for others that wish to look at the source of the chart, if that is question......

 

Source

 

There you go. I also have financial statements, SOE public releases and dev comments, though I would have to compile them all yet again. I have posted them in the past, will do so again if it is necessary.

 

At any rate, this was not a dig at you personally ZionHalcyon, only to point out you are incorrect. I do not think you are intentionally being dishonest here.

 

And frankly it is not your fault to believe that since one dev promoted that fallacy.

 

Also, though I would dispute the idea that the entire game was crap (Im paraphrasing) as you contended, I would agree that most folks probably judged the game correctly as being very poor in many ways. SWG had glaring flaws that continued for many years....in many ways the game was horrible.

Edited July 23, 2014 by LordArtemis

[hadoken]

That's no mystery. What is a mystery is where he got that. Pardon me, but in this Photoshop-laden world, I want to see the original source, not someone's copy on tinypic.

 

None of that data is 100% accurate but it does paint a decent enough picture. I know for a fact the DAOC data is incorrect on it, so who knows what else is.

[LordArtemis]

None of that data is 100% accurate but it does paint a decent enough picture. I know for a fact the DAOC data is incorrect on it, so who knows what else is.

 

It is a pretty poor graph for exact numbers. It represents a general comparison, but it does provide a good ballpark to visually compare games using publicly released info.

 

The author clearly points to the sources for each data point.

[hadoken]

The author clearly points to the sources for each data point.

 

Yea that doesn't mean they're accurate either. Sir Bruce had incorrect data too. Not all companies (in fact few companies in truth) were releasing numbers. A lot was extrapolated from vague press releases about successes or guesstimates based on player run census programs. Notice the only actual company contributing is CCP (so you know EVE is accurate, at any rate).

[ZionHalcyon]

Yea that doesn't mean they're accurate either. Sir Bruce had incorrect data too. Not all companies (in fact few companies in truth) were releasing numbers. A lot was extrapolated from vague press releases about successes or guesstimates based on player run census programs. Notice the only actual company contributing is CCP (so you know EVE is accurate, at any rate).

 

Hence why I wanted a more reliable source

[LordArtemis]

Yea that doesn't mean they're accurate either. Sir Bruce had incorrect data too. Not all companies (in fact few companies in truth) were releasing numbers. A lot was extrapolated from vague press releases about successes or guesstimates based on player run census programs. Notice the only actual company contributing is CCP (so you know EVE is accurate, at any rate).

 

Actually SOE released subscriber numbers until late 2007 when they decided to stop doing so. You are correct that some are assumptions, as I stated before, it is best for folks to seek the information themselves and draw their own conclusions.

 

The subscriber numbers for SWG post late 2007 are clearly assumed numbers. There was no way to know what the subscriber numbers were at that point so I believe the graph simply shows a steady drop to 0 when the game closed.

 

That was disclosed in my information block.

 

Game peaked shortly after launch, mid 2003 at 300k subs.

Game lost 25k subs by early 2004, and hovered back and forth around 250k to 275k subs with the release of JTL late 2004. Not a sub hemorrhage by any definition of the word IMO.

The CU came in early 2005 and caused subs to plummet below 200k. Before then subs had stabilized around 250k.

Subs rebounded late 2005 to around 230k subs with the announcement of NGE, but then started a spiral to the bottom after a dismal reception.

By mid to late 2006 SWG had bled from 70k to 120k in subs, to just above 100k subs after the middle of the year. Losses slowed to a more stable population until late 2007, from where (it is assumed, since Sony stopped releasing sub numbers at this point) the losses continued at a steady rate until the game closed in 2012.

Edited July 23, 2014 by LordArtemis

[LordArtemis]

Hence why I wanted a more reliable source

 

Fair enough. One has the right to reject any information source they deem is not reliable or suspect.

[Arkerus]

You can call BS if you like. The proof to the contrary has been posted multiple times. One can choose to refuse to accept the truth, or simply search for the truth themselves.

 

So I encourage everyone to seek out the sub numbers before and after the CU/NGE was released. You will discover that I am correct....subs hovered around 250 to 300k until they plummeted AFTER the CU/NGE was released.

 

Now, does that mean that other factors did not hurt SWG? Of course not...A game was released that grabbed millions of players when SWG couldnt do better than 300k...if that doesn't say limited appeal I don't know what does.

 

But the game was killed by the CU/NGE IMO. And that was clearly added to the game in an attempt to obtain WoW like numbers....which the devs eventually admitted to.

 

Again, all of this is public record. I encourage anyone to seek out the information themselves.

 

I don't have the link here at work but the one of the developers said the game was on a terrible downhill slide before the NGE and while he knows it was a mistake, they thought it would save the game.

 

I apologize I don't have the link here but I have read it multiple times. Yes, the NGE "killed" that game but it was not in good standing before the NGE.

 

(Update, Rubenfield took his blog down. The subs at the time was marked to be around 200k according to a response from Scott Jennings, who didn't appreciate Rubenfield defending the NGE...)

Edited July 23, 2014 by Arkerus