Support NeoGAF

Margalis · Apr 16, 2012

The "vast majority" still includes people who bought a 3-month subs up front but have stopped playing (which by the way is less than $15 a month), and I assume that since "vast majority" was not actual defined it's around 55-60%. If it was 80%+ they would say that.

MMO companies are very cagey about sub numbers and the way they define active subs. Every indication is that player numbers are down and that subs will follow.

Glass Rebel · Apr 16, 2012

So we have resorted to speculation? Nice.

AppleMIX · Apr 16, 2012

Margalis said:
The "vast majority" still includes people who bought a 3-month sub up front but have stopped playing, and I assume that since "vast majority" was not actual defined it's around 55%. If it was 80%+ they would say that.

Pure speculation.

You have no evidence to suggest that

A.)Alot of people bought a 3 month sub
B.)What EA defines as a vast majority.

Until you bring up actual evidence that suggest otherwise you're just talking out of your ass.

DaBuddaDa said:
And EA isn't a biased source with a vested interest in using fuzzy statistics to make they subscriber base seem as large as possible? Both options you presented are absurd; it's not one or the other, it's neither.

I'm sure they fudge the numbers. I'm not doubting that. However, trying to get a sub number off server statistics is not very accurate because they don't have access to all the information. No matter how much you spin it, 1.7 million is a positive number.

Margalis · Apr 16, 2012

Glass Rebel said:
So we have resorted to speculation? Nice.

I'm resorting to the pattern that basically every MMO follows, where server populations are clearly dropping but due to fuzzy math, free months, 3 and 6 months subs, launches in other regions, etc, the actual subscriber numbers are obfuscated for many months. (Not to mention stuff like counting 10 different accounts created in a PC cafe as 10 different subs etc)

No matter how much you spin it, 1.7 million is a positive number.

Then why is EA's stock not getting any sort of bump?

AppleMIX · Apr 16, 2012

Margalis said:
I'm resorting to the pattern that basically every MMO follows, where server populations are clearly dropping but due to fuzzy math, free months, 3 and 6 months subs, launches in other regions, etc, the actual subscriber numbers are obfuscated for many months. (Not to mention stuff like counting 10 different accounts created in a PC cafe as 10 different subs etc)

You mean that users drop off after a MMO is released. HOLD THE FUCKING PRESSES.

Also the article is very clear that it is active subs not created accounts.

Margalis said:
Then why is EA's stock not getting any sort of bump?

Investor were expecting it to take down wow. They also wanted a immediate return on their investment.

Cheech · Apr 16, 2012

The issue I had with ToR is the same one noted on the first page; it feels like a single player campaign. Especially with no dungeon matchmaking mechanism? It brings it down from "MMO" to "campaign other people exist in", really no different from a Souls game or something. Certainly not worth paying a monthly sub for.

The other issue I had with it is the whole thing feels like a WoW skin from 2005. The character stories were actually pretty good, but the actual gameplay was unimaginative and rote.

It's really too bad, but while playing ME3, I couldn't help but think, "So THIS is what Bioware's AAA team was working on, because ToR and DA2 sure as hell weren't it."

Massa · Apr 16, 2012

Opiate said:
I don't really agree -- this all assumes they continue their laser like focus on the PS3/360 to the detriment of everything else. The big publishers remain consistently absent on the handheld systems; they never embraced the Wii and allowed it to sink, despite obvious, strong interest from consumers; Facebook and iOS have EA, but Ubisoft, Take 2, and Activision have all largely avoided those platforms thus far.

I think Ubisoft and Activision would disagree with your post. They put out a great deal of games for Nintendo platforms and unlike, say, EA, Capcom or Sega they were very smart about the kinds of games they were making there. Ubisoft in particular was very successful on the Wii and DS.

Opiate said:
That is correct. The Wii was only one of my examples, and is the least significant I feel; it is not a "new opportunity" at this point. Whatever fruit might have been plucked from that tree remained unpicked for so long that it has long since withered.

These untapped opportunities go in all directions; from the extremely casual and (at least on GAF) loathed Facebook style social gaming, all the way to the other end of the spectrum to complex strategy games which have largely gone overlooked by the big publishers because they can't figure out how to transition them to consoles.

The reason why Zynga, Gameloft, (did you know Gameloft has more employees now than Take 2 does?) Valve, and Rovio have managed to grow so rapidly is that the big players -- who can normally crush the little guys with their sheer financial muscle -- have effectively left a power vacuum on iOS/PC/Facebook, and this has allowed new players to rush in and fill the void. If EA/Activision/Take 2 had all been there early and competing seriously in those markets, I have absolutely no doubt that Zynga, Valve and Gameloft either would not exist today or would be much smaller companies.

New markets present new growth opportunities for new and old players alike. You can blame EA and others for not jumping in sooner, but in no scenario would I picture companies like Zynga and Valve out of the picture. These companies were not just filling voids in the market place, they were essentially building and creating these markets themselves and that's both incredibly hard and very rare to see from giants and rich companies, which are notoriously slow to adapt to change in any market.

CzarTim · Apr 16, 2012

Proxy said:
So what you're saying is you can't? From what I've played of it TOR is flawed but certainly far from being a low quality game.

Not to mention it's doing way better financially than EA thought it would.

Ivan A Nguyen · Apr 16, 2012

You have to break a few eggs to make an inlet. I hope Jeff Green lands on his feet.

Nirolak · Apr 16, 2012

Full quote:

MCV said:
EA has denied the news, however, offering the following comment to MCV: "There are no lay-offs as such, we always have projects growing and morphing. At any given time there are new people coming in and others leaving. EA is growing and hiring and building teams to support the growing demand for digital games and services."

Source: http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/rumour-ea-preparing-for-500-1-000-layoffs/094475

They could still be laying people off, though the nature of the denial makes this a bit more likely than more wishy washy denials.

Wallach · Apr 16, 2012

Nirolak said:
Full quote:

Source: http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/rumour-ea-preparing-for-500-1-000-layoffs/094475

They could still be laying people off, though the nature of the denial makes this a bit more likely than more wishy washy denials.

I suppose we'll know more at the next investor call. I'm not really seeing anything that makes this rumor all that credible.

1-D_FTW · Apr 16, 2012

I own every EA game that's of any interest to me on Steam. And my total disappointment with BF3 was my final straw. So it may be years again before I purchase an EA game. Guess I'm part of the problem for them.

EDIT: I don't really see that above as a denial. It reads like PR speak to me. Yes, we have 500 - 1000 people being laid off. But they're not actually lay-offs. They're projects that have morphed. Coincidentally at the same time is all.

Glass Rebel · Apr 16, 2012

Hope it's true, things at EA definitely need a shaking up though.

Derrick01 · Apr 16, 2012

Glass Rebel said:
Hope it's true, things at EA definitely need a shaking up though.

The problem is the people who need to be fired or "laid off" aren't going to be in that 500-1000. It's going to be a lot of good people who aren't part of EA's evil, at least not willingly.

Glass Rebel · Apr 16, 2012

Derrick01 said:
The problem is the people who need to be fired or "laid off" aren't going to be in that 500-1000. It's going to be a lot of good people who aren't part of EA's evil, at least not willingly.

Oh, I wasn't suggesting that at all. I meant that despite things not looking as bad as the rumor/news suggested, something still needs to change.

Stallion Free · Apr 16, 2012

So EA treats it's customers like shit and then *possibly* fires 500-1000 employees? As if the company couldn't look any worse.

Hammer24 · Apr 16, 2012

Opiate said:
I see many publishers citing used game sales, piracy, and the economy, but very few blaming HD Development costs (one of the "excuses" listed earlier). HD Production costs are something we mention here, and something B developers mention, but not the big publishers.

But are they still that much of a factor?
I fully understand this argument, especially at the beginning of a generation. But this far in, especially the larger pubs should have been able to streamline their development (mostly for engines, but also in part for assets) in so far, that this should be neglible by now, no?

FieryBalrog · Apr 16, 2012

EA just gave a free month to nearly every subscriber of TOR, sub numbers really can't be doing that well.

They have to report sub numbers end of April, and by giving out the free month they are effectively inflating the real number of subs that they can tell to investors.

Just like the WoW annual pass, it only exists because subs are declining.

DaBuddaDa · Apr 16, 2012

Opiate said:
I see many publishers citing used game sales, piracy, and the economy, but very few blaming HD Development costs (one of the "excuses" listed earlier). HD Production costs are something we mention here, and something B developers mention, but not the big publishers.

Well there are also market benefits of inflating development costs: the barrier of entry becomes so high that the B-tier publishers can't commit the amount of money it would take to compete and they get squeezed out.

Beautifully Shaped Monsters · Apr 16, 2012

To be honest, I don't really understand the problem. Didn't we for years have what is HD resolutions on PC, without the cost spiralling out of control? I'm pretty sure that, at least as far back as 2002, I was playing games in an equivalent to 720p...

Please correct me if I'm missing something.

DaBuddaDa · Apr 16, 2012

Beautifully Shaped Monsters said:
To be honest, I don't really understand the problem. Didn't we for years have what is HD resolutions on PC, without the cost spiralling out of control? I'm pretty sure that, at least as far back as 2002, I was playing games in an equivalent to 720p...

Please correct me if I'm missing something.

Art/texture quality, world size and geometry complexity increased a thousandfold.

Beautifully Shaped Monsters · Apr 16, 2012

DaBuddaDa said:
Art/texture quality, world size and geometry complexity increased a thousandfold.

Hmm, yeah, I can kinda see it. But I really feel there must be more to it. Maybe marketing, or something...

Buxaroo · Apr 16, 2012

AppleMIX said:
How exactly is he right?

SWTOR has 1.7 million subs as of march and is in no danger of going F2P anytime soon. (Also subs have probably gone up because of the deals they're running and the release of 1.2)

http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/03/09/star-wars-the-old-republic-subscription-numbers-stabilize-at-1/

LOL. That's the CEO saying that. That's like listening to Iraqi's Ministry of Information say that the Iraqi Army is beating up the American Army. His whole purpose is to prop up the game and make it look good to the outside. When the quarterly statements come out by the company, that's when you will see whatever truth there is. He's under no obligation to tell you the truth. Read this quote and tell me where you get for a fact there are 1.7 million subs:

t's also worth noting that, according to EA's John Riccitello, the "vast majority" of these active subscribers have already used their 30-day trials, which means most of those 1.7 million subscribers are shelling out $15 per month to play the game.

Yeah...how does "which means most" derive from"already used their trials"? Any idiot can see the fallacy in that. CEO didn't even say "75%" or any number, only the author of the article pulled that out of his own ass. It's like that fucking idiot on the History channel always saying "so if X doesn't fit this scenario, then it must be Aliens"...no only to that idiot is it Aliens, everyone else it's inconclusive.

SWTOR has over 200,000 lines of dialogue compared to Skyrims 60,000.

Yeah, keep telling yourself that's important buddy. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

Also a game being exclusive to Origin is no different than a game being steamworks (the exception being Skyrim because of the workshop). One is just simply more popular than the other.

lol. Origin has as much in common with Steam as a Pinto does to a Ferrari. Does Origin sell games from all over? Nope. Just EA games. Snore. Does Origin have anything to build communities around? Nope. Just a "friends list" whopidy fucking do. Have you looked at the TOS for Origin? With Valve and Steam, my games will be there forever, and won't ever disappear because Valve decides it's not popular anymore. Gamefly's client has more in common with Steam than Origin does by a long shot. Origin's just EA's way of trying to get in on the digital distribution action that Steam/Gamefly/Impulse (now owned by gamefly lol) and others have done. But EA's probably is there is no incentive to go with Origin except to buy exclusives (thats why they chose BF3 and ME3 to be exclusive, they knew that a lot of people would buy the games no matter what, but they have alienated a lot of customers who won't be buying anything from Origin again, me being one of them).

FLEABttn · Apr 16, 2012

AppleMIX said:
(Also subs have probably gone up because of the deals they're running and the release of 1.2)

I'm really not really seeing that. Thursday had the highest number of people in the Republic Fleet I had seen in a while, and as soon as Friday hit, and throughout the entire weekend, it was back to the pre-patch in game population.

While I disagree with a number of the problems that people have with the game, that doesn't mean they aren't real problems to those people at least, and TOR can't afford to make those kinds of mistakes while being a distance number 2 to WoW. People will quit and go back. Which in the long run very well may push me back into WoW, if only because the game has become so damn hard to play because I can't find bodies.

CzarTim · Apr 16, 2012

Because no MMO has ever inflated subscription numbers. WoW never did it.

Fafalada · Apr 16, 2012

Beaten by 3 pages

BattleMonkey · Apr 16, 2012

FLEABttn said:
I'm really not really seeing that. Thursday had the highest number of people in the Republic Fleet I had seen in a while, and as soon as Friday hit, and throughout the entire weekend, it was back to the pre-patch in game population.

While I disagree with a number of the problems that people have with the game, that doesn't mean they aren't real problems to those people at least, and TOR can't afford to make those kinds of mistakes while being a distance number 2 to WoW. People will quit and go back. Which in the long run very well may push me back into WoW, if only because the game has become so damn hard to play because I can't find bodies.

Pop on my server was up 50% since the update, it was dropping pretty badly in the weeks leading up to 1.2, lot of folks were dissapointed with having to keep waiting so freaking long for the new content. Our guild had about 15 members who resubbed since Friday. All the free time they are giving out is going to inflate numbers though too for upcoming reports.

Buxaroo said:
LOL. That's the CEO saying that. That's like listening to Iraqi's Ministry of Information say that the Iraqi Army is beating up the American Army. His whole purpose is to prop up the game and make it look good to the outside. When the quarterly statements come out by the company, that's when you will see whatever truth there is. He's under no obligation to tell you the truth. Read this quote and tell me where you get for a fact there are 1.7 million subs:

Game was at 1.7mil the month before it, 30 days after they are still 1.7mil and only sold about .2 mil more actual game units. That means quite a few of those subs retained if there wasn't much of a drop compared to the amount of units of the game actually sold. But what the game is at right now is hard to say. Lot of people no doubt left since the last report, but a bunch of resubbed since for last weeks big update. But you aso have lot of offers and free trials running now so it's going to be hard to get a clear number. Game numbers are not going to stabilize to a proper telling state for a while as they are going to be inflated with spikes and actual player retention is not easy to calculate. I think 6 months in we will see a more clear picture.

Fafalada · Apr 16, 2012

ElTopo said:
Okay, I was just wondering if there had been a particular reason (since their stock never recovered at all from that hit), i.e. one unique to them.

There's a number of other game-companies that never recovered from that, including Nintendo for instance.

Wallach · Apr 16, 2012

FieryBalrog said:
They have to report sub numbers end of April, and by giving out the free month they are effectively inflating the real number of subs that they can tell to investors.

The free month is for current subscribers that have a fairly significant play time. How many of those do you really think are going to have subscriptions that expire precisely between the date this promotion goes out and the date data collection ends for investor meeting preparation? And then of those how many would choose to not resubscribe?

They are clearly using this promotion to smooth over negative player base perception caused by the last major patch snafu, but the results of all that aren't going to be relevant at all in time for the next investor call.

ArjanN · Apr 16, 2012

Fafalada said:
Beaten by 3 pages

We're still on the 2nd page.

vaelic · Apr 16, 2012

of course EA will deny. they'll do it on THEIR terms

Buxaroo · Apr 16, 2012

FieryBalrog said:
EA just gave a free month to nearly every subscriber of TOR, sub numbers really can't be doing that well.

They have to report sub numbers end of April, and by giving out the free month they are effectively inflating the real number of subs that they can tell to investors.

Just like the WoW annual pass, it only exists because subs are declining.

And to this is it. The dude who I quoted in the post above needs to learn the bullshit tricks that these companies try to pull to convince people to keep playing or that the TORtanic didn't hit the iceberg. Take it from someone who has been playing MMO's for 10 years, someone who has been playing PC games for 20 years: TORtanic is sinking. SWG had more going for it. SWTOR's whole design is the problem. Game mechanics: been there done that back in 2005-6. Storylines? Once done, no sense in keeping subbed. Endgame content? Running the same hard mode's over and over again. PVP? Just a means to gear grind, that's a fact. Space combat minigame? Snore, SWG did it better 7 years ago, and on a 1/5th the budget, and it wasn't on fucking console retarded rails. Using the Hero engine, which isn't even updated to modern specs, facilitate adding content. Snore. Canned animations, shitty performance, Clone Wars-esque style with the low res textures of something you found in DX8 mode. All in the name of making the game "accessible" which is corp speak for "we wanted to bring in the WoW crowd who are still using Voodoo 3000 videocards and K6-2's". All the while performing even more shittier than BF3 on the same hardware.

So you guys who are still playing TOR, more power to ya. But your on a sinking ship, and you are still playing your song while everyone else saw the writing on the wall that it's a colossal disappointment to a lot of players. When your AAA title MMO is offering free subs only 4 MONTHS after being released, something is wrong.

BattleMonkey · Apr 16, 2012

Wallach said:
The free month is for current subscribers that have a fairly significant play time. How many of those do you really think are going to have subscriptions that expire precisely between the date this promotion goes out and the date data collection ends for investor meeting preparation? And then of those how many would choose to not resubscribe?

They are clearly using this promotion to smooth over negative player base perception caused by the last major patch snafu, but the results of all that aren't going to be relevant at all in time for the next investor call.

I'm sure they were losing players due to how long they took to release the update. Plus then they had the whole "worst company" thing happen, and the game also is facing lot of competition for time with all the new games going on, lot of MMO players being drawn away into betas for D3, Tera, MoP, etc. They need to give away stuff to try and keep people when so many distractions are popping out. Part of me thinks they kept delaying 1.2 to have something big to dangle in front of players from all the other things going on in hopes of not losing subs.

Buxaroo said:
And to this is it. The dude who I quoted in the post above needs to learn the bullshit tricks that these companies try to pull to convince people to keep playing or that the TORtanic didn't hit the iceberg. Take it from someone who has been playing MMO's for 10 years, someone who has been playing PC games for 20 years: TORtanic is sinking. SWG had more going for it. SWTOR's whole design is the problem. Game mechanics: been there done that back in 2005-6. Storylines? Once done, no sense in keeping subbed. Endgame content? Running the same hard mode's over and over again. PVP? Just a means to gear grind, that's a fact. Space combat minigame? Snore, SWG did it better 7 years ago, and on a 1/5th the budget, and it wasn't on fucking console retarded rails. Using the Hero engine, which isn't even updated to modern specs, facilitate adding content. Snore. Canned animations, shitty performance, Clone Wars-esque style with the low res textures of something you found in DX8 mode. All in the name of making the game "accessible" which is corp speak for "we wanted to bring in the WoW crowd who are still using Voodoo 3000 videocards and K6-2's". All the while performing even more shittier than BF3 on the same hardware.

Wow your such and expert. No one here could match that experience.

Interfectum · Apr 16, 2012

TOR is in trouble for sure. Before I finally said goodbye to the game my server was quickly becoming a barren wasteland... even in the main hub.

jetjevons · Apr 16, 2012

Cheech said:
It brings it down from "MMO" to "campaign other people exist in", really no different from a Souls game or something.

Really? That sounds amazing. You sir, have just convinced me to give it a try.

Grymm · Apr 16, 2012

BattleMonkey said:
I'm sure they were losing players due to how long they took to release the update. Plus then they had the whole "worst company" thing happen, and the game also is facing lot of competition for time with all the new games going on, lot of MMO players being drawn away into betas for D3, Tera, MoP, etc. They need to give away stuff to try and keep people when so many distractions are popping out. Part of me thinks they kept delaying 1.2 to have something big to dangle in front of players from all the other things going on in hopes of not losing subs.

If the game was any good they wouldn't have anything to worry about. But it's not so they do.

FieryBalrog · Apr 16, 2012

Wallach said:
The free month is for current subscribers that have a fairly significant play time.

Fairly significant? You needed one max level character, now you don't even need that. A more relevant question is, how many people are still subbed after 4 months who can't even get a max level character or legacy level 6 by the end of next week?

How many of those do you really think are going to have subscriptions that expire precisely between the date this promotion goes out and the date data collection ends for investor meeting preparation? And then of those how many would choose to not resubscribe?

It doesn't matter what I think- it matters what EA thinks and obviously they think it's enough. You don't hand out a large number of free months for charity.

They are clearly using this promotion to smooth over negative player base perception caused by the last major patch snafu, but the results of all that aren't going to be relevant at all in time for the next investor call.

Of course the promotion will be relevant. You realize anyone with a 3 month sub who stopped would have run out by the time of the investor call, and now they will not? Ditto anyone with a one month sub who was running out. Because they will be in their free month and obviously they are not going to discount them as subscribers.

The patch "snafu" lasted a day or two. It is absolutely nothing that would cause them to give out a free month. The pet, maybe.

In fact, they specifically gave out a free day for the patch, as a separate bonus. So it should be obvious the free month was not for the patch.

BattleMonkey · Apr 16, 2012

Grymm said:
If the game was any good they wouldn't have anything to worry about. But it's not so they do.

Even good MMOs like RIFT have a hard time keeping player numbers in this market. The "king" of MMOs WoW has been declining as well. Competition and player perceptions are much higher now and with so much f2p out there pulling at people, it's going to be difficult for TOR. How good the game is though is subjective to what the player want's from their MMO.

Buxaroo · Apr 16, 2012

Grymm said:
If the game was any good they wouldn't have anything to worry about. But it's not so they do.

++ Like I said, 4 months in and they are already panicking by offering free months. And anyways, with lots of new MMO's coming out, like Guid Wars 2, Planetside 2, Secret World, etc etc, people are going to drop TOR like a used tampon to try those out. And take it from a former die hard SW/Bioware fan, GW2 is going to stomp all over TOR, I am in the beta, and it has something that TOR is seriously lacking: fun. And free after you buy it. And better gameplay. And better graphics. And better GUI. And better PVP. And dynamic gameplay. List goes on and on.

Wallach · Apr 16, 2012

FieryBalrog said:
The patch "snafu" lasted a day or two. It is absolutely nothing that would cause them to give out a free month. The pet, maybe.

No, the patch "snafu" was that they pulled the entire rated warzone PvP system from patch 1.2 and didn't tell the players until a handful of hours before it was set to go live. The fallout from that was quite large and is still in fact going on right now.

As for the rest of your post, the point about the promotion is that it's for current subscribers - only a fraction of which would have even had the possibility of having an expiring subscription in the window between when the promotion is happening and the cutoff for investor data gathering. Of those even fewer would actually remain unsubscribed. It's not something that even would have had the opportunity to significantly disrupt the subscriber numbers being delivered to investors this month.

SEGAvangelist · Apr 16, 2012

Buxaroo said:
So you guys who are still playing TOR, more power to ya. But your on a sinking ship, and you are still playing your song while everyone else saw the writing on the wall that it's a colossal disappointment to a lot of players. When your AAA title MMO is offering free subs only 4 MONTHS after being released, something is wrong.

Just let them enjoy their game. I've been on the sinking ship that is Age of Conan for years now, and I still love it no matter how frustrated I get with it.

CzarTim · Apr 16, 2012

People on this forum act like SWTOR took their little sister's virginity and never called her back. When all these "killer" games that are supposedly going to wipe TOR off the map actually do it, we can talk. Until then you're just blowing smoke.

DaBuddaDa · Apr 16, 2012

CzarTim said:
When all these "killer" games that are supposedly going to wipe TOR off the map actually do it, we can talk. Until then you're just blowing smoke.

I think EA should be rightfully afraid of the tidal wave of high production value free-to-play online content coming over the next 12 months, along with other high profile MMOs such as Tera and Guild Wars 2.

FieryBalrog · Apr 16, 2012

People are just disappointed with what could have been. All the money in the world, and they made a fairly derivative game, that is also technically unsound, and, in my eyes, aesthetically lacking.

Things like no/shitty AA, horrible textures from 2002, and ugly armor for the characters. I didn't want to spend time in the world except for the voice overs.

ProfessorMoran · Apr 16, 2012

Buxaroo said:
++ Like I said, 4 months in and they are already panicking by offering free months. And anyways, with lots of new MMO's coming out, like Guid Wars 2, Planetside 2, Secret World, etc etc, people are going to drop TOR like a used tampon to try those out. And take it from a former die hard SW/Bioware fan, GW2 is going to stomp all over TOR, I am in the beta, and it has something that TOR is seriously lacking: fun. And free after you buy it. And better gameplay. And better graphics. And better GUI. And better PVP. And dynamic gameplay. List goes on and on.

Was TOR worth what you paid for?

Buxaroo · Apr 16, 2012

Grymm said:
I could go into detail why the TORtanic is the TORtanic but I would suggest you go and TORture yourself to find out if all the available information isn't enough to help you get an idea.

FieryBalrog · Apr 16, 2012

No, the patch "snafu" was that they pulled the entire rated warzone PvP system from patch 1.2 and didn't tell the players until a handful of hours before it was set to go live. The fallout from that was quite large and is still in fact going on right now.

"quite large" on the forums maybe. I don't think you can gauge it from that, I think (obviously have no hard data) that most people don't give a flying fuck about rated warzones, and it was obvious to anyone who thought about it for more than 30 seconds that the rated WZ system was going to be complete garbage if it was single server only.

Grymm · Apr 16, 2012

FieryBalrog said:
"quite large" on the forums maybe. I don't think you can gauge it from that, I think (obviously have no hard data) that most people don't give a flying fuck about rated warzones, and it was obvious to anyone who thought about it for more than 30 seconds that the rated WZ system was going to be complete garbage if it was single server only.

What they do give a flying fuck about though is the pvp in general and whatever the hell they did with expertise that is leading to insta-gib deaths in pvp now coupled with overnerfing the most played class in the game at a time when they are bleeding subscribers was just a dumb move among many others.

The lack of rated warzones however isn't so disappointing because they aren't there, it's that they were there... up until about 5 hours before the patch went live.

The way EAWare handles everything from the design decisions making the game to the community is just extremely off putting. Their terrible management of TOR in all aspects has done more advertising for Guild Wars 2, TSW, and Tera than any advertising those games have done for themselves.

Buxaroo · Apr 16, 2012

CzarTim said:
People on this forum act like SWTOR took their little sister's virginity and never called her back. When all these "killer" games that are supposedly going to wipe TOR off the map actually do it, we can talk. Until then you're just blowing smoke.

Well considering what I paid for SWTOR, I could have bought a really good prostitute for one night and had WAY more fun than spending it on TORtanic.

ProfessorMoran said:
Was TOR worth what you paid for?

See above.

ps, the storylines were ok, but once you did one, the rest was just filler and I never got a second char to 50 because the game was just too damn boring and derivative from every other MMO released to date. TOR might be good for those who are new to MMO's, but to every WoW/EVE/EQ/Planetside/SWG/MMOevermade, the game is "been there done that didn't get a reach around as promised".

CzarTim · Apr 16, 2012

DaBuddaDa said:
I think EA should be rightfully afraid of the tidal wave of high production value free-to-play online content coming over the next 12 months, along with other high profile MMOs such as Tera and Guild Wars 2.

Right, and I agree. But until these games actually come out and do damage, saying it's a sinking ship is overkill. The people saying the game is shit were the same people saying it was shit at launch when it sold 2 million copies and kept a significant portion of those subs (whatever the real number) for several months.

God knows the game has its problems, but it wasn't designed for the GAF zerg. People who WANT this game to fail baffles me. How is that good for ANYBODY? Do you think investors will ever push for a big budget MMO again if TOR is a complete train wreck? Especially after the stream of WoW clones that have crashed and burned.

But I know the Internet hates Lucas, EA, and BioWare, so can't be too surprised.

Support NeoGAF

Rumor: EA to layoff 500-1000 people [EA: We're hiring 100's, headcount up this year]

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Mrgrgr

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Cock Encumbered

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Neo Member

Banned

Member

Fafracer forever

Member

Fafracer forever

Member

Member

Banned

Neo Member

Member

Member

Bish loves my games!

Banned

Member

Member

Neo Member

Member

Gold Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Neo Member

Member

Banned

Neo Member

Member

Similar threads