Forbes thinks this games is a complete financial disaster. With loss in subs, the threat of Free-2-play on the horizon, are you sticking with game past the six month mark? what are your thoughts?

With current layoffs can TOR developers now produce content at a pace to keep players happy?

(I know they say they can, Because they will never say they can't)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/07/19/five-reasons-ea-is-in-decline/

Note: how this game performs financially has a trickle down effect on EA's overall stock

Edit: New links showing reputable business site stating the link between TOR success and electronic arts stock

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-07/industries/31606454_1_ea-sales-active-subscribers-colin-sebastian

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17989756

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/332913/ea-shares-drop-after-analyst-expresses-old-republic-concerns/

http://www.videogamer.com/pc/star_wars_the_old_republic/news/ea_stock_drops_3_after_star_wars_the_old_republic_doubts.html

Edit: This is another post from another analyst whom agrees with the forbes article

Goes into way more detail about how EA stock is falling and why

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-06-21-stock-ticker-why-eas-market-valuation-has-crashed/

here's a good quote from the article

-"Firstly, there's Star Wars: The Old Republic. EA's stock price went into decline after The Old Republic's launch, and hasn't recovered yet - and that timing is unlikely to be a coincidence. Expectations among investors for SWTOR were extremely high, given the game's much-publicised high development costs (which probably make it the most expensive game project ever), the strength of the Star Wars license, the track record of developer Bioware and, crucially, the tantalising possibility of building an ongoing MMO revenue stream for EA which would match the one enjoyed by rival Activision Blizzard from World of Warcraft. While it would be unfair to characterise SWTOR as a complete failure, it has certainly not been a success on the level which EA or its investors would have wanted. The game has lost 400,000 subscribers since February, and it seems inevitable that the company will be forced into an embarrassing (but probably commercially sensible) transition to a free-to-play model sooner rather than later."

Forbes Comment today is projecting the number of subscribers is now at 500k

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsavitz/2012/07/30/ea-on-weak-warfighter-sales-cowen-chops-estimates/

EA shareholders PDA

Forbes thinks this games is a complete financial disaster. With loss in subs, the threat of Free-2-play on the horizon, are you sticking with game past the six month mark? what are your thoughts?

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/07/19/five-reasons-ea-is-in-decline/

 

Note: how this game performs financially has a trickle down effect on EA's overall stock

 

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/332913/ea-shares-drop-after-analyst-expresses-old-republic-concerns/

http://www.videogamer.com/pc/star_wars_the_old_republic/news/ea_stock_drops_3_after_star_wars_the_old_republic_doubts.html

They made up their investment already. How is making a slight profit, a disaster? Is it a resounding hit/success? That's debatable. But is is it a disaster? Certainly not/

They made up their investment already. How is making a slight profit, a disaster? Is it a resounding hit/success? That's debatable. But is is it a disaster? Certainly not/

Have they made up there investment? Forbes seems to think the game cost 500 million with marketing

They made up their investment already. How is making a slight profit, a disaster? Is it a resounding hit/success? That's debatable. But is is it a disaster? Certainly not/

It's about opportunity costs. The money invested in ToR could have been invested elsewhere into a potentially more profitable venture. Hence, it represents a loss of sorts.

It's about opportunity costs. The money invested in ToR could have been invested elsewhere into a potentially more profitable venture. Hence, it represents a loss of sorts.

I just don't see the game producing the content needed if EA's going to lay off the people to produce the content. It makes sense right, why would they pump more money into a sinking ship

Doubt TOR has anything to do with EA's recent economic development, why? Because all gaming companies have started to feel the heat the last year or more.

My personal belief is that the recession has finally hit the industry, so much for recession proof.

They have likely made up their money even taking into account marketing and cost of running and producing new content. That is assuming the sub number they previously announced were correct, which I believe they are. But that's me estimating cost to be a bit less than what they state. Overall I'd say they've earned atleast 200 million but most likely 250+.

Even if they've not made it back yet, mmos certainly make their money through longevity, making back the initial investment and then investing less to maintain and produce new content over how much is coming in.

So yeah, even if they havnt made it back yet, they will be very cautious to invest more money (despite it being what the game needs) - likely monitor what's going on with the game before deciding what to do. They certainly won't abandon it, because if they're even remotely close to making their money back, its after that point that the profits become worthwhile.

The main question is, will people stick around paying their subs waiting for EA to monitor and decide what to do. the longer they take the more likely they will have to.go F2P, but they don't seem to realise what they've done wrong.None the less, if it goes F2P I wouldn't call it a failure but far from a success. It generally is a more attractive option for your casual gamer who frowns upon paying a monthly sub, without realising how much.they spend on DLC etc.

Doubt TOR has anything to do with EA's recent economic development, why? Because all gaming companies have started to feel the heat the last year or more.

 

My personal belief is that the recession has finally hit the industry, so much for recession proof.

You didn't even read the article or check out the link linking the fact that subs loss in the TOR meant a stock loss for EA. Not all companies are feeling this effect either. Companies that are innovative like Rockstar and Valve (Valve was estimated to be worth 3 billion) continue to be successful in this economy.

Doubt TOR has anything to do with EA's recent economic development, why? Because all gaming companies have started to feel the heat the last year or more.

 

My personal belief is that the recession has finally hit the industry, so much for recession proof.

so something a company puts over 100 million dollars in development of has nothing to do with their economic standing?

really?

(and yes I know it was reported as MUCH more than 100 mil)

They have likely made up their money even taking into account marketing and cost of running and producing new content. That is assuming the sub number they previously announced were correct, which I believe they are. But that's me estimating cost to be a bit less than what they state. Overall I'd say they've earned atleast 200 million but most likely 250+.

Even if they've not made it back yet, mmos certainly make their money through longevity, making back the initial investment and then investing less to maintain and produce new content over how much is coming in.

So yeah, even if they havnt made it back yet, they will be very cautious to invest more money (despite it being what the game needs) - likely monitor what's going on with the game before deciding what to do. They certainly won't abandon it, because if they're even remotely close to making their money back, its after that point that the profits become worthwhile.

The main question is, will people stick around paying their subs waiting for EA to monitor and decide what to do. the longer they take the more likely they will have to.go F2P, but they don't seem to realise what they've done wrong.None the less, if it goes F2P I wouldn't call it a failure but far from a success. It generally is a more attractive option for your casual gamer who frowns upon paying a monthly sub, without realising how much.they spend on DLC etc.

Some good points in that article .

Many companies are moving forward with practices that consumers deem bad for the gaming industry. Ubisoft has spearheaded always-on DRM. Activision continues to charge $15 for map packs that are rehashes of old content. Yet neither of them draw quite as much hate as EA, which was literally voted the worst company in America this year, a mantle they laughed off rather than recognizing it as a serious issue.

And of course ! In red can be said for many developers in charge as well.

Following yesterday’s report that EA was laying off more Star Wars: The Old Republic personnel, their stock hit a year-long low of $11.28. It’s been a sharp decline for EA over the past year, and though many gaming companies aren’t performing particularly well, EA is among the worst.

 

It’s so bad that CEO John Riccitiello had to come out and start making excuses for their performance.

 

But is that really the reason? Investors just don’t understand gaming? That would seem to be ignoring the root causes of EA’s specific woes, and it’s worth discussing what’s been so terrible about the last year for them that can account for this steady decline.

Since release, there have been many layoffs associated with SWTOR, including the executive producer of the game as announced yesterday. SWTOR might end up going free-to-play like so many other of World of Warcraft’s competition, but that’s not the model that’s going to earn them their money back. They really needed the monthly fee model to work, and the fact that it hasn’t makes the game a failure, no matter how many players a free-to-play switch may bring back.

In the end they can bring things around, by taking in player feedback from PTS and give

players the STAR WARS experience.

What feedback can they take ? class balance issues they ignore,CC=stunlocking hell.

STAR WARS experience

lack of immersion with having players stand around in a hallway

on a spacestation.And stop making the entire game one big money sink !

Minigames and actual iconic jedi outfits etc.

Badly written stories not making any sense to many classes.

Choices have no real consequences.

Lack of world PvP, no reason to do it.

No animal mounts etc.

You didn't even read the article or check out the link linking the fact that subs loss in the TOR meant a stock loss for EA. Not all companies are feeling this effect either. Companies that are innovative like Rockstar and Valve (Valve was estimated to be worth 3 billion) continue to be successful in this economy.

Correlation does not imply causation, just because TOR has seen sub loss the same time as EA stocks lose value does not mean EA is losing stock value because of it, why do I believe that? Because all the major game publishing companies are feeling it.

And don't use Valve and Rockstar as examples, proves you don't know anything. Valve does not trade in the stock market, and Rockstar is under Take Two, which has had the same downward trend as EA and Activision.

It's not just one game.

EA is huge, They spent over 100 million on APB a MMO that lasted 3 months before they turned ALL the servers off and they were fine.

Wow... Professional troll here. It's posts like this, combined with no follow up interation from the leadership of this game that are hurting it right now.

Right now, stuff like this, what is going on in the forums is much more hurtful to the game than anything going on in the game itself.

Right now, stuff like this, what is going on in the forums is much more hurtful to the game than anything going on in the game itself.

delusional statement is delusional

Correlation does not imply causation, just because TOR has seen sub loss the same time as EA stocks lose value does not mean EA is losing stock value because of it, why do I believe that? Because all the major game publishing companies are feeling it.

 

And don't use Valve and Rockstar as examples, proves you don't know anything. Valve does not trade in the stock market, and Rockstar is under Take Two, which has had the same downward trend as EA and Activision.

Activision Vivendi is not on a downward trend. They match the NASDAQ trends.

Correlation does not imply causation, just because TOR has seen sub loss the same time as EA stocks lose value does not mean EA is losing stock value because of it, why do I believe that? Because all the major game publishing companies are feeling it.

 

And don't use Valve and Rockstar as examples, proves you don't know anything. Valve does not trade in the stock market, and Rockstar is under Take Two, which has had the same downward trend as EA and Activision.

The reason valve never went public is because they knew it would hurt their bottom line, because as soon as you let investors run your company is the moment you start making cr@ppy games.

Wow... Professional troll here. It's posts like this, combined with no follow up interation from the leadership of this game that are hurting it right now.

 

Right now, stuff like this, what is going on in the forums is much more hurtful to the game than anything going on in the game itself.

Stop, stop, stop... I am not trolling, I'm honestly asking if the layoff are not a cause for concern? Is the fact Free-2-Play on the horizon not a cause for concern? If this discussion scares you then don't reply.

Really its not all happy and go lucky right now, customer service with this game is a joke and I feel (My opionon only) that the devs are out of touch with the players in general, and there's no active leadership that is propelling this game forward

And as long as i have an active subscription, I'm free to voice my concern to other gamers

It's about opportunity costs. The money invested in ToR could have been invested elsewhere into a potentially more profitable venture. Hence, it represents a loss of sorts.

What other product have they produced in the last two years aside from TOR and BF3 that warrants a multimillion dollar ad campaign. BF3 is what caused most of their financial issues. Forbes should consider that travesty. TOR made up for it's monetary investment and produced a profit, which is the only thing shareholders should be concerned with.

You didn't even read the article or check out the link linking the fact that subs loss in the TOR meant a stock loss for EA. Not all companies are feeling this effect either. Companies that are innovative like Rockstar and Valve (Valve was estimated to be worth 3 billion) continue to be successful in this economy.

Stocks also fell because of less than enthusiastic response to the millions of dollars and capital put into a marketing blitz for battlefield 3 over the last year. EA has seen a large jump in digital sales, but a lot of that is through popcap and their other acquisition's abilities to produce cheap arcade games available through a digital platform.

TOR is not the silver bullet reason why EA's stock fell. Is it a big reason? Possibly. But I think it's irresponsible journalism to just pin it on TOR because of what some ranters and pseudo-reviewers say about it on forums. It's also important to point out that there's some inconsistency about the # of subscriptions lost. In May, EA reports a 25% decrease in active players, and this was before the unlimited trial to 15. They put their initial count at 1.7 million, and a quarter of that cut out, is still 1.3 million.

EVE Online, Aion, LOTRO and others have less than a million subscriptions or premium players. They are still considered successful, and some are F2P. All this boils down to some pretty shoddy writing and an attempt to jump onto the "TORTANIC" bandwagon that is becoming all too common these days.

Cant argue with the bottom line. I do wonder who is to blame seems easy to blame EA but maybe they just invested 300 million into a game and that game has not lived upto expectations.

Still I am sure I read on one of the propaganda posts that people are coming back since 1.3 and more people will come back for 1.4 so maybe the game is not dead.

Activision Vivendi is not on a downward trend. They match the NASDAQ trends.

Activision/Blizzard might see a steady up/down trend, but the parent publishing company Vivendi had a large hit in march they're just getting back up from, EA and TakeTwo on the other hand has had the exact same six month decline.

The reason valve never went public is because they knew it would hurt their bottom line, because as soon as you let investors run your company is the moment you start making cr@ppy games.

The reason could also be that if they went public they would see an intimidate drop, I'm sure they don't want to follow in Facebook's footsteps